ML12340A275

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18, Revision 0, Attachment E Through J

ML12340A275
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	11/27/2012
From:	Zachry Nuclear
To:	Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CR-CNS-2012-06126 12-E18, Rev 0
Download: ML12340A275 (354)

Text

Z=A ACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment E Condition Reports (CRs)Attachment E, Page 1 of 291 Revision 0 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06126 Originator:

Bon,Matthew A Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design DFIN Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Able,Alan L Discovered Date: 09/13/2012 15:32 Originator Phone: 4028255187 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/13/2012 16:22 Condition

==

Description:==

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

A ladder and scaffolding stored beneath the stairs could potentionally impact the side of EE-DS-125ASD during a seismic event. See attachments for more information.

A folder was found stored on top of EE-DS-125ASD, presenting a fire risk. See attachments for more information.

Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the area surrounding EE-STRR-125B Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

Reccomend moving the scaffolding and ladder to a new location in order to adhere to Seismic Housekeeping principles.

Reccomend moving the folder immediately to avoid having unnecessary combustibles in the area.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION PROGRAM FUNCTION KEYWORDS REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES DEPT CAUSING KEYWORDS Trend Code P301 P412 SEISMIC 1 C09 MNT LADDER STORAGE Attachments:

Condition Description Folder Scaffold_1 Seismic checklist Seismic Walkdown checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 2 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06126 Initiated Date: 9/13/2012 16:22 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/24/2012 9:57 Summary

Description:

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

A ladder and scaffolding stored beneath the stairs could potentionally impact the side of EE-DS- 125ASD during a seismic event. See attachments for more information.

A folder was found stored on top of EE-DS-125ASD, presenting a fire risk. See attachments for more information.

Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the area surrounding EE-STRR-125B Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed because of actions taken as documented were considered adequate for this condition.

This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions.If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 3 of 291 OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06126 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Martin,Curtis R Approved By: MurphyBrian P 09/14/2012 12:34 09/14/2012 13:58 Operability

==

Description:==

CNS-I-EE-DSC-125ASD, ALT SD FDR DISC.TS 3.3.3.2. The Alternate Shutdown System provides the control room operator with sufficient instrumentation and controls to place and maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition from a location other than the control room. This capability is necessary to protect against the possibility of the control room becoming inaccessible.

With the plant in safe shutdown condition, the High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) System, the safety/relief valves, the Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC) System, and the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Shutdown Cooling System can be used to remove core decay heat and meet all safety requirements.

The long term supply of water for the HPCI System and the ability to operate shutdown cooling from outside the control room allow extended operation in a shutdown condition above 212 deg F. The Alternate Shutdown System is required to provide equipment at appropriate locations outside the control room with a design capability to promptly shut down the reactor, including the necessary instrumentation and controls, to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition.

The referenced material (folder and scaffold pipes) were moved away (> 1 fl) from the panel upon validation of the condition.

With exception of the paper folder, the material was hanging in the designated hard mounted wall racks and restrained by steel chain. No contact occurred between the material and the EE disconnect.

EE-DSC-125ASD remains functional and the ASD function required by LCO 3.3.3.2 remains OPERABLE for this condition per 0.5.OPS.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 4 of 291 Hn tergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06126 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: CBOAT Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L 09/18/2012 11:57 Assignment

==

Description:==

XV.B.4 Pending information added to the CR. (from the 09/18/12 CRG meeting)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 5 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06126 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: LOSF NA Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/24/2012 07:34 Reportability

==

Description:==

No loss of nuclear safety function.

Condition affects safety related equipment, but does not affect ability to perform the safety function. (elm 9/17/12 pending CRG disposition of Cat B or A., dnm 9/24/12 based on "D" classification)

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 6 of 291 Entgy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06128 Originator:

Forbes,Jared A. Originator Phone: 4028252918 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design DFIN Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Able,Alan L Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/13/2012 16:03 Initiated Date: 09/13/2012 17:13 Condition

==

Description:==

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

A light in the SE-Quad RX BLDG El. 881 up in the overhead is in contact with tubing. During a seismic event, the swaying of the lamp could potentially cause damage to the tubing. The tubing is associated with PC-238.Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity around CS-MOV-MO26B.

During this walk-by, the team observed a light in the overhead that is in contact with tubing.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommend that the configuration of the light is moved away from the tubing as to allow sufficient space to avoid contact with the tubing.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Attachments:

Condition Description Light Fixture 1 Light Fixture 2 Area walk-by checklist Siesmic Walkdown Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 7 of 291 Entegy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06128 CA Number: I Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : SiteI CNS CNS Group Ops AOM Shift Staff CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS-Name Beger,Nathan L Dia,Khalil M Originated By: Myers,John R 9/15/2012 03:43:42 Performed By: Dia,Khalil M 9/20/2012 17:25:16 Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Dedic,James R 9/21/2012 00:50:39 Current Due Date: 09/21/2012 Initial Due Date: 09/21/2012 CA Type: OPERABILITY INPUT CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Provide a prompt determination per 0.5.OPS. Include checklist per 0.5.OPS Attachment 3.Response: Operability evaluation, NEDC 12-036 and 0.50PS, Attachment 3 are attached.

This action is complete and ready for closure. SJJ, 9/20/12 KMDIA 9/20/2012 Subresponse

Closure Comments: Prompt determination accepted.Attachments:

Resp Description 0.50PS attachment 3 6128.pdf Operability Evaluation NEDC 12-036 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 8 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06128 CA Number: 2 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS Group Licensing Staff CNS Licensing Mgmt CNS Licensing Staff CNS J Name I McCutchen,Edward L Vanderkamp,David W McCutchen,Edward L Originated By: McCutchen,Edward L 9/17/2012 08:42:42 Performed By: Vanderkamp,David W 9/24/2012 12:09:26 Subperformed By: McCutchen,Edward L 9/24/2012 11:24:25 Approved By: Closed By: Vanderkamp,David W 9/24/2012 12:09:26 Current Due Date: 09/25/2012 Initial Due Date: 09/25/2012 CA Type: REGULATORY CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Review the operability evaluation, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition.

Response: Approved.Subresponse:

Reviewed the Operability Evaluation attached to CA#1 which concluded the configuration of the tubing and lamp is acceptable.

Therefore, no past operability concern is found. No new reportable condition was revealed.Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 9 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06128 CA Number: 3 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS CA&A Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Group J Name I Dewhirst,Linda Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Hathaway,Tricia D Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M 9/18/2012 14:10:50 10/16/2012 13:31:06 10/16/2012 09:01:47 10/16/2012 13:31:06 Current Due Date: 10/17/2012 Initial Due Date: 10/17/2012 CA Type: DISP -CA CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Validate and establish action plan necessary to fix identified condition.

CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Response: Concur. BTW 10/16/12 concur RME Description 4 Subresponse

See Attached.Closure Comments: 10/3/12 -Per 10/2/12 CRG, CR assignment changed from MNT to DED. (thath9l)Attachments:

Subresp Description CAT C Fix (CR-CNS-2012-6128 CA#3)Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 10 of 291 Entetgy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06128 CA Number: 4 Site I Assigned By: CNS Assigned To: CNS Subassigned To: CNS Group PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS-Name Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: 10/16/2012 09:02:18 Current Due Date: 04/10/2013 Initial Due Date: 04/12/2013 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Design Engineering to determine the proper course of action to resolve this issue (removing/moving the light fixture, evaluating/justifying the configuration, etc.).Response: Subresponse

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 11 of 291 I Entegy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06128 Initiated Date: 9/13/2012 17:13 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

C Closed by: Summary

Description:

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

A light in the SE-Quad RX BLDG El. 881 up in the overhead is in contact with tubing. During a seismic event, the swaying of the lamp could potentially cause damage to the tubing. The tubing is associated with PC-238.Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity around CS-MOV-MO26B.

During this walk-by, the team observed a light in the overhead that is in contact with tubing.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 12 of 291 Enteigy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06128 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE-OP EVAL Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Myers,John R Approved By: Beger,Nathan L Operability

==

Description:==

09/15/2012 04:05 09/15/2012 04:17 The correct valve number is PC-V-328.

PC-DPT-3B2 HI SIDE ISO. Per a review of SAP and the drawings below, the following instruments are attached to the associated tubing. In addition, the tubing is part of the primary containment boundary.PC-PT-30B WIDE RANGE TORUS PRESS DIV II EQ -5 to 70 psig Output to PC-PR-2B, PMIS N344, PC-SC-4B -DW TORUS PRESS SIGNAL DISTR MODULE TS 3.3.3.1 Function 7c -PC Pressure, SP -Wide Range PC-DPT-3B2 TORUS LEVEL DP T EQ 0 to 30 feet Output to PC-LR-IB, PMIS N020, PC-SC-1B -DW TORUS LEVEL SIGNAL DISTR MODULE TS 3.3.3.1 Function 3 -SP Level -Wide Range PC-DPIS-516A ATM TO TORUS DIFF PRESS EQ -2 to + 2 psid Output to Alarm H-i/A-5, PC-SOV-SPV243 TS 3.6.1.7, Reactor Building to Suppression Chamber Vacuum Breakers Based on the attached evaluation, there is reasonable assurance the tubing could survive an impact with the light during a seismic event. An OE will be required to confirm this conclusion.

Approval Comments: Concur.Attachments:

Operability Description Instrument tubing drawing Material specification Evaluation Engineering Input Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 13 of 291

ýEntergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06128 Version: 1 Significance Code: C Classification Code: RCR (FIX)Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

1I.B.4 Operable-Op Eval 09/18/2012 11:57 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 14 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06128 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: LOSF NA Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 09/17/2012 08:43 Reportability

==

Description:==

No loss of nuclear safety function.

Condition affects safety related equipment, but does not affect ability to perform the safety function.

Licensing has opened an action to itself (CA#2) to review the operability evaluation, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 15 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06130 Originator:

Metzger,Adam Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design DFIN Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Able,Alan L Discovered Date: 09/13/2012 16:02 Originator Phone: 4028255111 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/13/2012 17:22 Condition

==

Description:==

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

During 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that SGT-FAN- 1F damper arm and the lever for SGT-AD-B could affect the operation for each other during a seismic event due to a small gap that is present between the two.Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the area surrounding SGT-FAN-IF and SGT-AD-B.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that DED determine if the current configuration is a potential issue.EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name AD-B Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code I 2 SGT REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06232 CR-CNS-2012-06238 CR-CNS-2012-06487 CR-CNS-2012-06497 CR-CNS-2012-06500 CR-CNS-2012-06501 CR-CNS-2012-06573 CR-CNS-2012-06579 CR-CNS-2012-06582 CR-CNS-2012-06647 CR-CNS-2012-06648 CR-CNS-2012-06650 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 16 of 291 I Engy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06130-REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item CR NUMBER TIED CR-C CR NUMBER TIED CR-C CR NUMBER TIED CR-C CR NUMBER TIED CR-Cl CR NUMBER TIED CR-Cl CR NUMBER TIED CR-Cl CR NUMBER TIED CR-Cl TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Desc NS-2012-066051 NS-2012-06654 NS-2012-06657 NS-2012-06467 NS-2012-06486 NS-2012-06498 NS-2012-06502 Trend Code P501 P412 1 Attachments:

Condition Description Area Walk-by Checklist Seismic Walkdown Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 17 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: I Site I Group Assigned By: CNS CA&A Mgmt CNS Assigned To: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Subassigned To: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS-Name Dewhirst,Linda Estrada,Roman M Wolken,Brian Originated By: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/17/2012 15:32:11 Performed By: Estrada,Roman M 10/16/2012 17:22:40 Subperformed By: Marotz,Mitchell M 10/16/2012 13:47:30 Approved By: Closed By: Estrada,Roman M 10/16/2012 17:22:40 Current Due Date: 10/16/2012 CA Type: DISP -CA Initial Due Date: 10/16/2012 CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Validate and establish action plan necessary to fix identified condition.

Ensure concerns from CR-CNS-2012-06232, CR-CNS-2012-06238, CR-CNS-2012-06257, CR-CNS-2012-06294, CR-CNS-2012-06312, CR-CNS-2012-06332, CR-CNS-2012-06467, CR-CNS-2012-06486, CR-CNS-2012-06498, CR-CNS-2012-06502, CR-CNS-2012-06487, CR-CNS-2012-06497, CR-CNS-2012-06500, CR-CNS-2012-06501, CR-CNS-2012-06573, CR-CNS-2012-06579, CR-CNS-2012-06582, CR-CNS-2012-06647, CR-CNS-2012-06647, CR-CNS-2012-06648, CR-CNS-2012-06650, CR-CNS-2012-0665 1, CR-CNS-2012-06654, and CR-CNS-2012-06657 are adequately addressed along with this CR.CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Response: concur RME Subresponse:

See Attached.Closure Comments: Attachments:

Description 4 Subresp Description CR-CNS-2012-6130 Action Plan Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 18 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: 2 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS Group PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS J Name Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: 10/16/2012 13:30:17 Current Due Date: 04/10/2013 Initial Due Date: 04/12/2013 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Configuration Control Update CR-CNS-2012-6294

-DED to update plant drawing(s) to be in compliance with current configuration and calculations.

CR-CNS-2012-6163

-DED to update plant drawing(s) to be in compliance with current configuration.

Response: Subresponse

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 19 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: 3 Site Group Assigned By: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Assigned To: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Subassigned To: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS J Name I Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M 10/16/2012 13:33:06 Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Current Due Date: 03/18/2013 CA Type: ACTION Initial Due Date: 03/20/2013 CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

DED to research and determine if further action is necessary CR-CNS-2012-6232

-DED to research the configuration of the support in CNS documentation and determine if further action is needed.CR-CNS-2012-6238

-DED to research the configuration of the rack in CNS documentation and determine if further action is needed.CR-CNS-2012-6257

-DED to research the configuration of the conduit with respect to the valve. If no justification documentation exists, DED to generate the appropriate actions to resolve the issue.CR-CNS-2012-6312

-DED to determine an alternative configuration for the light fixture.CR-CNS-2012-6467

-DED to determine if the current configuration has been documented appropriately.

If it is not, DED to generate the appropriate analysis and documentation.

CR-CNS-2012-6498

-DED to determine if further bracing is necessary or recommended.

CR-CNS-2012-6502

-DED to determine if the current configuration matches the documented configuration and update the applicable documents accordingly.

CR-CNS-2012-6497

-Engineering to research alternative methods of Ethernet cable restraint.

CR-CNS-2012-6501

-DED to determine if this configuration is a potential issue and if a cage is required for installation.

CR-CNS-2012-6651

-DED Civil to research cracking in the floor slab of the Control Building Basement.

If this issue has no history, include inspection of this specific item in the Maintenance rule walkdowns.

Response: Subresponse:

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 20 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: 4 Site I Group Assigned By: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Assigned To: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Subassigned To : CNS Mnt Fin Team Staff CNS J Name Marotz,Mitchell M Sarver,Andrew J Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M 10/16/2012 13:36:04 Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Current Due Date: 04/10/2013 CA Type: ACTION Initial Due Date: 04/12/2013 CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Maintenance to complete in-the-field action CR-CNS-2012-6312

-Maintenance to implement the configuration in the field. (Reference CR-CNS-2012-6130 CA#2)CR-CNS-2012-6332

-Maintenance to tighten the anchor bolts in accordance with CNS procedure.

CR-CNS-2012-6486

& 6487 -Maintenance to determine if improvement of the lug engagement into the "saddle" of the spade is achievable.

If it is achievable, Maintenance to reseat the "saddle" next to the lug.CR-CNS-2012-6497

-Maintenance to reapply adhesive clips to the Ethernet cable and hub.CR-CNS-2012-6500

-Maintenance to repair the conduit raceway support as to be consistent with the adjacent supports.CR-CNS-2012-6573

-Maintenance to reattach the missing clip.CR-CNS-2012-6647

-Maintenance to verify that the pin has been installed on the machine guard in question.

If it has not, Maintenance to immediately install a pin.CR-CNS-2012-6650

-Repair the degraded grout that is surrounding some of the floor mounted pipe supports in the basement of the Control Building.CR-CNS-2012-6130

-DED to determine if the condition is an issue based on existing CNS documentation.

DED to generate appropriate documentation, as applicable.

Response: Need you to help drive this, not sure where it came from, your team may not do it all but you can help coordinate it with you planning support. Good job for one of your guys to run with for you.. .thanks Subresponse

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 21 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: 5 Site I Group Assigned By: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Assigned To: CNS Work Control Plan Sch Out Mgr CNS Subassigned To: CNS Work Control Plan Sch Out Mgr CNS J Name I Marotz,Mitchell M Houston,Jeffrey Woerth,Steven C Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M 10/16/2012 13:43:10 Performed By: Houston,Jeffrey 10/21/2012 21:56:41 Subperformed By: Woerth,Steven C 10/19/2012 12:08:35 Approved By: Closed By: Houston,Jeffrey 10/21/2012 21:56:41 Current Due Date: 01/05/2013 CA Type: ACTION Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Initial Due Date: 01/05/2013 CA Priority: Planning to complete Work Orders for activities associated with CR-CNS-2012-6130 CA# 5. Tasks to be completed are: CR-CNS-2012-6312

-Maintenance to implement the configuration in the field. (Reference CR-CNS-2012-6130 CA#2)CR-CNS-2012-6332

-Maintenance to tighten the anchor bolts in accordance with CNS procedure.

CR-CNS-2012-6486

& 6487 -Maintenance to determine if improvement of the lug engagement into the "saddle" of the spade is achievable.

If it is achievable, Maintenance to reseat the "saddle" next to the lug.CR-CNS-2012-6497

-Maintenance to reapply adhesive clips to the Ethernet cable and hub.CR-CNS-2012-6500

-Maintenance to repair the conduit raceway support as to be consistent with the adjacent supports.CR-CNS-2012-6573

-Maintenance to reattach the missing clip.CR-CNS-2012-6647

-Maintenance to verify that the pin has been installed on the machine guard in question.

If it has not, Maintenance to immediately install a pin.CR-CNS-2012-6650

-Repair the degraded grout that is surrounding some of the floor mounted pipe supports in the basement of the Control Building.CR-CNS-2012-6130

-DED to determine if the condition is an issue based on existing CNS documentation.

DED to generate appropriate documentation, as applicable.

Response: See response for this CA. Working with origionator to resolve. No actions under this CA as it would violate PS&O procedures to comply.Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 22 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION CR-CNS-2012-06130 Subresponse

This action is being closed because PS&O was not contracted before the action was generated.

The action in inappropriate as written and cannot be implemented by the assigned due date. This condition was documented in CR-CNS-2012-7550.

I will provide a current status for the tasks that were listed for information to the originator.

In addition PS&O will work with the originator to develop correct actions with proper due dates that can be supported.

CR-CNS-2012-6312

-Maintenance to implement the configuration in the field. (Reference CR-CNS-2012-6130 CA#2)Right now this is not a work item in that the corrective actions for this have not been determined.

CR-CNS-2012-6332

-Maintenance to tighten the anchor bolts in accordance with CNS procedure.

Work Item 4914662 generated, scheduled, and being processed.

CR-CNS-2012-6486

& 6487 -Maintenance to determine if improvement of the lug engagement into the "saddle" of the spade is achievable.

If it is achievable, Maintenance to reseat the "saddle" next to the lug. Work Items 4915291 and 4915293 have been generated, scheduled and are being processed.

CR-CNS-2012-6497

-Maintenance to reapply adhesive clips to the Ethernet cable and hub. TSP 4916446 to IT has been created -this will be completed by IT.CR-CNS-2012-6500

-Maintenance to repair the conduit raceway support as to be consistent with the adjacent supports.Has been screened but no order created yet.CR-CNS-2012-6573

-Maintenance to reattach the missing clip. Has been screened but no order created yet.CR-CNS-2012-6647

-Maintenance to verify that the pin has been installed on the machine guard in question.

If it has not, Maintenance to immediately install a pin. (Completed by FIN Spot)CR-CNS-2012-6650

-Repair the degraded grout that is surrounding some of the floor mounted pipe supports in the basement of the Control Building.

WO 4915713 generated, scheduled, and being processed.

CR-CNS-2012-6130

-DED to determine if the condition is an issue based on existing CNS documentation.

DED to generate appropriate documentation, as applicable.

This is not a work item -Engineering item.Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 23 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: 6 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To: Site I CNS CNS CNS Group PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS-Name I Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M Performed By: Subperformed By: 10/16/2012 13:44:28 Approved By: Closed By: Current Due Date: 04/03/2013 Initial Due Date: 04/05/2013 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

DED to track completion of work CR-CNS-2012-6579

& CR-CNS-2012-6582

-DED to track the completion of the replacement activity and ensure that all appropriate documentation exists and is accurate.

Following the full installation of the Voltage Regulator Cabinet, this Corrective Action may be closed.Response: Subresponse

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 24 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06130 CA Number: Assigned By: 7 Site I Group CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS J Name Marotz,Mitchell M Assigned To: CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS Subassigned To: CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS Walters,Chad L Originated By: Marotz,Mitchell M 10/16/2012 13:45:42 Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Current Due Date: 04/10/2013 CA Type: ACTION Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Initial Due Date: 04/12/2013 CA Priority: Develop and implement an inspection plan CR-CNS-2012-6654

& CR-CNS-2012-6648

-Develop and implement an inspection plan for the SW Booster Pump instrument racks to determine the extent of the corrosion.

Include removal of paint and surface corrosion on the floor mounted pipe supports (with visible corrosion), as well as repainting.

Determine any further action necessary based on the results of the inspection.

Response: Subresponse:

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 25 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06130 Initiated Date: 9/13/2012 17:22 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

C Closed by: Summary

Description:

Seismic and general housekeeping issues Condition:

During 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that SGT-FAN- IF damper arm and the lever for SGT-AD-B could affect the operation for each other during a seismic event due to a small gap that is present between the two.Requirement not met: Failure to follow seismic and general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the area surrounding SGT-FAN- IF and SGT-AD-B.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 26 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06130 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Myers,John R 09/14/2012 01:38 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/14/2012 03:41 Operability

==

Description:==

SGT-AO-VD543B, SGT UNIT B EF-R-1F VORTEX DMPR INLET -Essential Q2, Q3 SGT-AD-VD543B, SGT UNIT B EF-R-1F VORTEX DMPR INLET -Essential Q1, Q2, Q3 SGT-AD-B, SGT UNIT B EF-R-1F OUTLET DMPR, Essential

-Q1, Q2, Q3 SAP Questions:

1. Equipment functions as a pressure boundary for a portion of the system being used to accomplish the safety-related function.2. Equipment actively operates (change states) for the system to accomplish a safety-related function.3. Maloperation of the equipment has the potential to prevent or inhibit safety-related operation of the system.Note the manual damper is only moved when it is necessary to adjust flow or dP.This condition was previously evaluated under CR 2011-06448.

See the attached pictures for a better understanding of the existing condition.

See the attached for an evaluation of this condition including supplemental technical data. Based on this evaluation, SGT is operable.WO 4842039 was performed in June 2012 to invert the linkage rod from the position identified in the 2011 CR and in the first photos attached.

As seen in the Later Photos attached, there is now clearance.

Approval Comments: concur Attachments:

Operability Description Pictures Latest Photos Work Order List Checklist Evaluation Engineering Evaluation 12-E58 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 27 of 291

ýEnterw I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06130 I Version: I Significance Code: C Classification Code: RCR (FIX)Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Ref. CR 2011-06448 XIII. B.3 09/17/2012 13:58 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 28 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06130 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: McCutchen,Edward L 09/17/2012 08:52 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Reportability for CR 2011-06448 noted,"Reasonable assurrance exists that SGT-B remained operable and capable of performing it required function and remained capable of meetings its required 30 day mission time." Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 29 of 291 Engy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06150 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028255187 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/14/2012 10:01 Initiated Date: 09/14/2012 11:15 Condition

==

Description:==

Housekeeping issues near LRP-RACK-139 Condition:

A c-clamp vice grip was found being used as a wheel chuck on a large tool box supported by 4 wheels.There was a heavy chain around the toolbox that could be used for seismic housekeeping, however only one of the chain?s clips was attached to the eyebolt in the wall.The other end of the chain was connected to the eyebolt by the walkdown engineer when the condition was discovered.

Two oxygen tanks were found less than 25 feet away from the tool box and could become missiles or explosion hazards if the tool box were to impact them.See attachments for more information.

Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the vicinity of LRP-RACK-139 Immediate Action

Description:

Walkdown engineer took the action to reattach the chain to the eyebolt.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that Maintenance be notified as to correct the issue in the future.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Attachments:

Condition Description Wheel chuck tool box tool box 2 tool box chain Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 30 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06150 Initiated Date: 9/14/2012 11:15 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: HathawayTricia D 10/24/2012 10:02 Summary

Description:

Housekeeping issues near LRP-RACK-139 Condition:

A c-clamp vice grip was found being used as a wheel chuck on a large tool box supported by 4 wheels.There was a heavy chain around the toolbox that could be used for seismic housekeeping, however only one of the chain?s clips was attached to the eyebolt in the wall.The other end of the chain was connected to the eyebolt by the walkdown engineer when the condition was discovered.

Two oxygen tanks were found less than 25 feet away from the tool box and could become missiles or explosion hazards if the tool box were to impact them.See attachments for more information.

Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During a walk-down in the vicinity of LRP-RACK-139 Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed because of actions taken as documented were considered adequate for this condition.

This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions.If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 31 of 291

[ Entey I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06150 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Stander,Brian R 09/15/2012 12:43 Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/15/2012 14:04 Operability

==

Description:==

LRP-RACK-139, Containment Pressure & Level Local Rack 139, supports PC-PT-1A1, DW LEVEL PRESS T LO, PC-PT-4A, DW PRESS T, and PC-PT-5A1, CONTAINMENT PRESS T. There associated isolation and calibration valves are also supported by LRP-RACK-139.

All of these components per their Q-list are essential as a pressure boundary for primary containment.

PC-PT-4A1 also provides information for a regulatory 1.97 instrument for drywell pressure.LCO 3.3.3.1 is applicable.

The primary purpose of the PAM instrumentation is to display plant variables that provide information required by the control room operators during accident situations.

This information provides the necessary support for the operator to take the manual actions for which no automatic control is provided and that are required for safety systems to accomplish their safety functions for Design Basis Events.LCO 3.6.1 is applicable.

The function of the primary containment is to isolate and contain fission products released from the Reactor Primary System following a design basis Loss of Coolant Accident and to confine the postulated release of radioactive material.

The primary containment consists of a steel pressure vessel in the shape of an inverted light bulb with a torus?-shaped suppression chamber located below and encircling the drywell, which surrounds the Reactor Primary System and provides an essentially leak tight barrier against an uncontrolled release of radioactive material to the environment.

This CR documents a concern with the storage of a temporary item in a seismic sensitive area as defined by procedure 0.41.Per procedure 0.41, unrestrained Temporary Items are specific exclusions that have a pre-established Seismic Safe Standoff Distance of 1 ft to Safety-Related equipment.

Per procedure 0.41, a tool box with wheels that are chocked/locked is an unrestrained temporary item. Chocking is a method used to secure the equipment which could otherwise roll (e.g., a multi wheel cart or dolly has at least two wheels secured, a straight pipe spool staged on a floor is blocked, etc.). The tool box has 2 wheels that are chocked by the tool boxes already installed wheel stops. Therefore the C clamp is not required.

Also the use of a C clamp for this application is not prohibited.

The tool box is under the 2 over 1 for height versus width, therefore the chain restraint is also not required.

The tool box is not within 4 feet of any shock sensitive electrical equipment as defined by procedure 0.41, therefore only the 1 foot distance requirement needs to be met. The tool box is located over 1 foot from any plant equipment.

Therefore this tool box is meeting the requirements of procedure 0.41 for seismic concerns and the equipment located on LRP-RACK-139 is operable.

There is no immediate reportability associated with this issue per procedure 2.0.5 or NUREG 1022.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description 0.5.OPS attachment 2 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 32 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06150 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: CBOAT Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

09/18/2012 11:57 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 33 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06150 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/17/2012 08:41 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 34 of 291 I EtgyI CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06159 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/14/2012 15:03 Originator Phone: 4028255270 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/14/2012 15:15 Condition

==

Description:==

General housekeeping issues.Condition:

It was noticed that a piece of metal was found behind panel EE-PNL-AA3.

The piece of metal was not found on the configuration drawings.Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing a Seismic Walkdown of EE-PNL-AA3 and noticed the foreign object located behind EE-PNL-AA3.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that the metal object be removed to adhere to good housekeeping practices.

TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type KEYWORDS REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code SEISMIC 1 C09 P301 Attachments:

Condition Description Metal Object Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 35 of 291 Entergy ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06159 Initiated Date: 9/14/2012 15:15 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: HathawayTricia D 10/24/2012 9:57 Summary

Description:

General housekeeping issues.Condition:

It was noticed that a piece of metal was found behind panel EE-PNL-AA3.

The piece of metal was not found on the configuration drawings.Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing a Seismic Walkdown of EE-PNL-AA3 and noticed the foreign object located behind EE-PNL-AA3.

Remarks

Description:

Info from MNT Mgr -2012-6159 piece of metal was found to be a crescent wrench and was removed on 9/17 Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed because of actions taken as documented were considered adequate for this condition.

This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions.If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 36 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06159 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Stander,Brian R Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/15/2012 07:28 09/15/2012 07:45 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.7 is applicable.

The AC and DC electrical power distribution systems are designed to provide sufficient capacity, capability, redundancy, and reliability to ensure the availability of necessary power to ESF systems so that the fuel, Reactor Coolant System, and containment design limits are not exceeded.Per procedure 0.41, EE-PNL-AA3 is not listed as one of the seismic shock sensitive electrical equipment and therefore does not have electrical relays with special vulnerability to chatter due to bumping and jarring. Per the attached picture to this CR, the crescent wrench did not have very much room to move and would not have been able to generate any significant velocity during a seismic event to impact EE-PNL-AA3 based on engineering judgment.

The weight of the crescent wrench is less than the force an individual would place on the panel during normal usage. Therefore based on engineering judgment the complete weight of the 12" wrench being forced against the side of EE-PNL-AA3 would not have caused any damage during a safe shutdown earthquake.

The crescent wrench has been removed. With the wrench removed, there are no material concerns in the plant relative to this CR. Therefore panel EE-PNL-AA3 is operable.

There is no immediate reportability associated with this issue per procedure 2.0.5 or NUREG 1022.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description 0.5.OPS Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 37 of 291 Entetgy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06159 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: CBOAT Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

XV.B.4 Wrench removed, (from the 09/18/12 CRG meeting)09/18/2012 11:57 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 38 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06159 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/17/2012 08:11 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 39 of 291 S Entgy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06163 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Sup Elec Prog Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/14/2012 16:27 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/14/2012 16:54 Condition

==

Description:==

Anchorage doesn?t match plant drawings.Condition:

SEWS noted that the anchorage for LRP-PNL-(25-7) used 1/2? inserts, which was verified by the SWE team.However Drawing #4244 describes anchorage as 3/8? diameter.

The installed anchorage is more conservative and doesn?t need to be removed however there is still a discrepancy between the as-built condition and the plant drawings.Requirement not met: As built conditions do not match plant drawings.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing a Seismic Walkdown of LRP-PNL-(25-7).

During this walkdown, it was noticed that the anchor bolts don?t match plant drawings.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

Update plant drawings to match As-Built conditions.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type KEYWORDS REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code DRAWING DEFICIENCY 1 C02 P316 Attachments:

Condition Description Anchorage Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 40 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06163 CA Number: I Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS J Name Dewhirst,Linda Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: Hathaway,Tricia D Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Estrada,Roman M 9/18/2012 14:45:20 10/16/2012 17:44:37 10/16/2012 13:48:25 10/16/2012 17:44:37 Current Due Date: 10/17/2012 CA Type: ENHANCE Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Resolve Identified Condition.

CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Initial Due Date: CA Priority: Description 4 10/17/2012 Response: concur RME Subresponse:

This corrective action is to be closed to CR-CNS-2012-6130 CA#2. (See Attached)Closure Comments: Attachments:

Subresp Description CR-CNS-2012-6130 Action Plan Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 41 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06163 Initiated Date: 9/14/2012 16:54 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

E Closed by: Summary

Description:

Anchorage doesn?t match plant drawings.Condition:

SEWS noted that the anchorage for LRP-PNL-(25-7) used 1/2? inserts, which was verified by the SWE team.However Drawing #4244 describes anchorage as 3/8? diameter.

The installed anchorage is more conservative and doesn?t need to be removed however there is still a discrepancy between the as-built condition and the plant drawings.Requirement not met: As built conditions do not match plant drawings.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing a Seismic Walkdown of LRP-PNL-(25-7).

During this walkdown, it was noticed that the anchor bolts don?t match plant drawings.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 42 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06163 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Stander,Brian R Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/15/2012 13:59 09/15/2012 14:06 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.3.1.1 and 3.6.1 are applicable.

LRP-PNL-(25-7) provides structural support for instruments that support RPS and for tubing connected to primary containment.

Therefore the structural integrity of LRP-PNL-(25-7) is necessary to ensure that these components will operate properly when required.

This CR identifies that the anchorage bolts for LRP-PNL-(25-7) are larger and therefore more conservative than what is listed on drawing 4244. Drawing 4244 for structural reactor building equipment foundations is a status 3 document and is not as built. Having larger anchor bolts provides better structural support for LRP-PNL-(25-7) during a seismic event. Therefore the structural integrity of LRP-PNL-(25-7) is functional in its supporting role for equipment which is installed on it and the equipment supported by LRP-PNL-(25-7) is operable.

There is no immediate reportability associated with this issue per procedure 2.0.5 or NUREG 1022.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description 0.5.OPS attachment 2 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 43 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06163 Version: 1 Significance Code: E Classification Code: DD Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Initiate DCN.09/18/2012 11:57 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 44 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06163 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: DOCUMENTATION Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/17/2012 08:15 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is a question or issue of proper documentation and does not introduce or identify an equipment, radiological nor security problem. Should the question's answer reveal a CNS condition, a new CR will be written.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 45 of 291 Entergy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06208 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028252527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/17/2012 18:08 Initiated Date: 09/17/2012 18:10 Condition

==

Description:==

Corrosion on Intake Structure Local Racks.Condition:

It was noticed the strainer instrument racks in the Intake Structure have moderate to severe corrosion.

The anchorage bolt heads are rounded off due to corrosion.

Requirement not met: Supports should be cleaned and painted to prevent corrosion from affecting the support.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing an Area Walk-By in the Service Water Pump Room.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that DED be contacted to determine the current structural adequacy of the racks.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc AGING MANAGEMENT TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 46 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 1 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To: Site I CNS CNS CNS Group Ops AOM Shift Staff CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS Name I Penfield,Rod L Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Originated By: Wheeler,Steven C 9/18/2012 00:58:19 Performed By: Dia,Khalil M 9/24/2012 17:24:44 Subperformed By: Walters,Chad L 9/24/2012 17:22:29 Approved By: Closed By: Beger,Nathan L 9/24/2012 17:32:11 Current Due Date: 09/25/2012 Initial Due Date: 09/25/2012 CA Type: OPERABILITY INPUT CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Provide a prompt determination per 0.5.OPS. Include checklist per 0.5.OPS Attachment 3.Response: Agree with the evaluation.

KMDIA Subresponse

See Attached.Closure Comments: Concur with OE. Closed CA-1.Attachments:

Subresp Description Operability Evaluation Attachment

1. 3 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 47 of 291 Entery I CA DUE DATE EXTENSION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 Corrective Action: CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA-00001 Version: 1 Requested Duedate: 09/25/2012 Requested By: Dia,Khalil M Approved By: Beger,Nathan L Approved:

Y Previous Duedate: 09/21/2012 09/20/2012 09/20/2012 Request

Description:

Need more time to allow inspection of DIV 1 SW racks. The racks will be inspected this weekend. OPS manager and GMPO provided verbal approval.

KMDIA Approved

Description:

Concur with extension.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 48 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 2 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To: Site I CNS CNS CNS Group Licensing Staff CNS Licensing Mgmt CNS Licensing Staff CNS-Name I McCutchen,Edward L Vanderkamp,David W McCutchen,Edward L Originated By: McCutchen,Edward L 9/18/2012 08:12:45 Performed By: Vanderkamp,David W 9/26/2012 16:16:49 Subperformed By: McCutchen,Edward L 9/26/2012 10:35:38 Approved By: Closed By: Vanderkamp,David W 9/26/2012 16:16:49 Current Due Date: 09/26/2012 Initial Due Date: 09/26/2012 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Review the operability evaluation, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition Response: Approved.Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 49 of 291 Entetgy CORRECTIVE ACTION CR-CNS-2012-06208 Subresponse

NEW RESPONSE AND APPROVALS ATTACHED.OLD RESPONSE: Licensing reviewed the Operability Evaluation (OpEval) in CA#1 and discussed it with the author, i.e. the System Engineer (SE). From the discussion with the SE, of those instrument racks identified in the OpEval, Rack #5 is the only one that was likely to have failed in the event of a barge impact or seismic event. Rack #5 contains SW-PI-364B and SW-PI-365B (local indicators), SW-PS-364B (actuates auto-isolation of non-essential loads on low pressure), and SW-PS-365B (auto-starts SWP 'B' on low pressure).

The impact of the rack failing in the worst manner possible can be postulated.

If the rack failed such that PS-364B and PS-365B did not fail low, then the auto isolation of non-essential loads would not occur and SWPs in Division 2 would not auto-start on low pressure.

The OpEval identifies the mechanism of stanchion degradation to be rust and corrosion.

These are time dependent mechanisms which have been occuring over the life of the plant. No firm evidence is presented pointing to a specific time in the past at which the corrosion became excessive to the point of failure in a seismic event or barge impact. Therefore, SW Division 2 was appropriately called INOPERABLE at the time of discovery, and the period of time for any past-operability concern cannot be determined.

Therefore, CNS was not in a Condition Prohibited by TS per NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.2.Similarly, for a loss of safety function (LOSF) to have occurred, both SW Divisions would have to become INOPERABLE at the same time. Since CNS cannot determine the specific time in the past at which the corrosion became excessive to the point of failure in a seismic event or barge impact in either division, then we cannot determine if Division 1 and 2 were both INOPERABLE at the same time. Per NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.7, the level of judgement for reporting an event under this criterion is a reasonable expectation of preventing fulfillment of a safety function.

Because CNS has had at least one Division of SW in operation while at power over the last three years and since we can assume the INOPERABILITY of the Division 2 occurred at the time of discovery, then we have a reasonable expectation that the safety function could have been be accomplished.

Therefore, no LOSF occurred.However, the mechanism of corrosion in instrument racks for both divisions of SW does represent a Common-cause Inoperability of Independent Trains or Channels.

NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.8 notes that an event is reportable if the independent trains or channels were inoperable at the same time, regardless of whether or not they were discovered at the same time. Further, NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.8 Example 2, Marine Growth Causing Emergency Service Water To Become Inoperable (Common-Mode Failure Mechanism), says "With Unit 1 at 74 percent power and Unit 2 at 100 percent power, ESW pump IA was declared inoperable because its flow rate was too low to meet acceptance criteria.

Three days later, with both units at the same conditions, ESW pump IC was declared inoperable for the same reason. The ESW pumps provide the source of water from the intake canal during a design-basis accident.

In both cases, the cause was marine growth of hydroids and barnacles on the impeller and suction of the pumps. Following maintenance, both pumps passed their performance tests and were placed in service. Pump testing frequency was increased to more closely monitor pump performance." Example (2) is similar to the SW situation at CNS identified in CR-CNS-2012-01597 (Div 1 SW Instrument Rack) in March and CR-CNS-2012-06208 (Div 2 SW Instrument Rack) in September.

Thus, this condition is REPORTABLE as an LER per 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(vii)(D)].

There is no corresponding requirement for immediate reporting in 10 CFR 50.72. The LER is reportable in 60 days from the date of discovery (9/17/12).

The LER is due 11/16/12.Closure Comments: 10/5/12-Revised CA SubResponse per ca originator and Resp Mgr. See attachment on SubResponse. (thath9l)Attachments:

Subresp Description Updated Response with Mgr Approval Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 50 of 291 EnteIgy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 3 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To: Site I CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS Name I Dewhirst,Linda Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Originated By: HathawayTricia D 9/20/2012 15:09:36 Performed By: Gardner,Gabriel G 10/11/2012 10:50:14 Subperformed By: Walters,Chad L 10/11/2012 10:18:35 Approved By: Closed By: Dia,Khalil M 10/11/2012 12:32:58 Current Due Date: 10/14/2012 Initial Due Date: 10/14/2012 CA Type: DISP -ACE/LT CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Perform apparent cause evaluation in accordance with EN-LI-i 19. Per CRG, ensure to review CA's from CR-CNS-2012-01597 when completing this evaluation.

Also ensure that CR-CNS-2012-06289, CR-CNS-2012-06296 and CR-CNS-2012-06384 are adequately addressed along with this CR.CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Description 4 Response: Concur with sub-response.

-GGG Subresponse

See the attached evaluation, barrier analysis and EFE.Closure Comments: Agree with the evaluation two new corrective actions will be assigned.

KMDIA Attachments:

Subresp Description Barrier Analysis Equipment Failure Evaluation ACE Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 51 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 4 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To: Site I CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS J Name I Dewhirst,Linda Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Originated By: HathawayTricia D 9/20/2012 15:17:35 Performed By: Dia,Khalil M 9/26/2012 06:46:39 Subperformed By: Walters,Chad L 9/25/2012 16:43:03 Approved By: Closed By: Dia,Khalil M 9/26/2012 06:46:39 Current Due Date: 09/27/2012 Initial Due Date: 09/27/2012 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

As Responsible Manager you are to: 1. 7 Perform a pre-job brief with the apparent cause evaluator, using the guidance provided by CA&A; and 2. l]Ensure evaluator completes JIT with CA&A manager or designee if not qualified to TQD CAP200 or TQD SCRIOO.CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Description 4 Response: Perform a pre-job brief with the apparent cause evaluator was performed, the individaul is qualified to TQD CAP200 see attached document.

KMDIA Subresponse

SED Manager conducted a PJB with SW system engineer on 9/24/12. Documentation is attached.Closure Comments: Attachments:

Subresp Description PJB Documentation Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 52 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION ICR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 5 Site I Assigned By: CNS CA&A Mgmt CNS Group-Name I Dewhirst,Linda Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Assigned To: CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS Subassigned To : CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS Originated By: HathawayTricia D 9/20/2012 15:18:28 Performed By: Gardner,Gabriel G 10/11/2012 10:46:27 Subperformed By: Walters,Chad L 10/11/2012 10:23:03 Approved By: Closed By: Dia,Khalil M 10/11/2012 12:18:38 Current Due Date: 10/14/2012 CA Type: ACTION Initial Due Date: 10/14/2012 CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Determine if an effectiveness review is appropriate per EN-LI-i 19, Step 5.3[3](k)(9).

If appropriate, utilize the guidance in EN-LI-119, Attachment 9.10. Ensure the plan is documented in the Proposed Corrective Action section of the Apparent Cause Evaluation including the criteria specified in Attachment 9.10 Step 1. Effectiveness Review action(s) should be issued under LO-CNSLO-2012-00011.

CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Response: Concur with sub-response.

-GGG Description 4 Subresponse

The failure was associated with instrument racks due to internal corrosion.

These racks were original plant equipment and the failure occurred after nearly 40 years. No effectiveness review is appropriate for the identified condition.

Closure Comments: Agree with the response close based on actions taken. KMDIA Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 53 of 291 Entergy I CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 6 Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS Group J Name I Walters,Chad L Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Originated By: Walters,Chad L Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: 10/11/2012 13:25:55 Current Due Date: 02/26/2013 Initial Due Date: 02/28/2013 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Identify and track the associated work orders to complete extent of condition examinations of SW system instrument racks.Response: Subresponse:

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 54 of 291 EnteIgy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06208 CA Number: 7 Site I Assigned By: CNS Assigned To: CNS Subassigned To: CNS Group PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Sys NSSS Staff CNS-Name I Walters,Chad L Dia,Khalil M Walters,Chad L Originated By: Walters,Chad L Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: 10/11/2012 13:26:53 Current Due Date: 05/30/2013 Initial Due Date: 06/01/2013 CA Type: ACTION CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Determine if PM is required based on the AS-LEFT configuration of the SWP room instrument racks.Response: Subresponse:

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 55 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06208 Initiated Date: 9/17/2012 18:10 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS Current Contact: needs indep review (SW)Current Significance:

B Closed by: Summary

Description:

Corrosion on Intake Structure Local Racks.Condition:

It was noticed the strainer instrument racks in the Intake Structure have moderate to severe corrosion.

The anchorage bolt heads are rounded off due to corrosion.

Requirement not met: Supports should be cleaned and painted to prevent corrosion from affecting the support.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing an Area Walk-By in the Service Water Pump Room.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 56 of 291 OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06208 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE-OP EVAL Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C 09/18/2012 04:46 Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/18/2012 05:00 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.7.2 Service Water.The safety objective of the Service Water (SW) system is to provide a heat sink for the Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC), Residual Heat Removal (RHR), and diesel generator cooling systems under transient and accident conditions.

The system provides a continuous supply of cooling water directly to the diesel generator and to the secondary side of the REC heat exchangers and to the RHR Service Water Booster Pumps adequate for the requirements under both normal operations and under transient and accident conditions.

The system shall be capable of providing direct cooling to essential REC heat loads following an accident or after a passive REC failure.The affected instrument racks support equipment that provides indications and interlocks for SW strainer and system operation.

The ACE completed in April, 2012 for CR-CNS-2012-1597, "SW Pump Room Instrument Rack Failure" and CR-CNS-2012-2056 reference the extent of condition performed for the rack failure that found no "soft spots" and no evidence that the SW pump room instrument racks were not solidly attached.Additionally, the SW pump room was walked down this shift by DED Civil Engineers and the instrument racks were inspected.

No physical evidence of loose racks or cracking in the racks was identified.

Inspections of the instrument rack base plates did not identify anything more than surface rust or staining.

This inspection concluded that the conditions have not changed since the extent of condition was completed for the ACE in April, 2012. Reasonable Expectation of Operability of the SW system exists. SED has been contacted to complete an Operability Evaluation by Friday, September 21.Approval Comments: Concur.Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 57 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06208 OperabilityVersion:

2 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/19/2012 14:59 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/19/2012 15:10 Operability

==

Description:==

Evaluation by engineering after paint and rust removal determined that Div. 2 SW subsystem operability cannot be supported.

Div 2 SW was declared inoperable 19SEP12/1030.

LCOs 3.7.2.A, 3.3.3.2.A, 3.6.1.3.A and 3.8.1.B were entered.Approval Comments: Concur -CR added to LCO tracker TS12-SW DIV 2 INST RACKS -01 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 58 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06208 Version: 1 Significance Code: B Classification Code: RCR (AC -L)Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Sys Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

1I.B.4 Operable -Op Eval Ensure eval looks at CAs from 2012-01587 and timeliness.

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 59 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CRCNS-201206208 Reportability Version: 2 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By : 00/00/0000 00:00 Reportability

==

Description:==

Licensing reviewed the OpEval in CA#1 and discussed it with the author, the System Engineer (SE). From the SE, of those instrument racks identified in the OpEval, Rack #5 is the only one that was likely to have failed in the event of a barge impact or seismic event which bounds seismic events. Rack #5 contains SW-PI-364B and SW-PI-365B (local indicators), SW-PS-364B (actuates auto-isolation of non-essential loads on low pressure), and SW-PS-365B (auto-starts SWP 'B' on low pressure).

The impact of the rack failing in worst manner possible can be postulated.

If the rack failed such that PS-364B and PS-365B did not fail low, then the auto isolation of non-essential loads would not occur and SWPs in Division 2 would not auto-start on low pressure.

The OpEval identifies the mechanism of stanchion degradation to be rust and corrosion.

These are time dependent mechanisms which have been occurring over the life of the plant. No firm evidence is presented pointing to a specific time in the past at which the corrosion became excessive to the point of failure in a seismic event or barge impact. Therefore, SW Division 2 was appropriately called INOPERABLE at the time of discovery, and the period of time for any past-operability concern cannot be determined.

Therefore, CNS was not in a Condition Prohibited by TS per 10 cFR 50.73(a)(i)(b).

Similarly, for a loss of safety function (LOSF) to have occurred, both SW Divisions would have to become INOPERABLE at the same time, Since CNS cannot determine the specific time in the past at which the corrosion became excessive to the point of failure in a seismic event or barge impact in either division, then CNS cannot determine if Division I and 2 were both INOPERABLE at the same time. Per NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.7, the level ofjudgment for reporting an event under this criterion is a reasonable expectation of preventing fulfillment of a safety function.

Because CNS has had at least one Division of SW in operation while at power over the last three years and since we can assume the INOPERABILITY of the Division 2 occurred at the time of discovery, then we have a reasonable expectation that the safety function could have been be accomplished.

Therefore, no LOSF occurred per 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(v).

NUREG 1022 Section 3.2.8 notes that an event is reportable if the independent trains or channels were inoperable at the same time, regardless of whether or not they were discovered at the same time. Example 2 in that section of NUREG 1022 presents a somewhat similar situation of marine growth causing Emergency Service Water to become inoperable (a Common-Mode Failure Mechanism).

This example says "With Unit 1 at 74 percent power and Unit 2 at 100 percent power, ESW pump 1 A was declared inoperable because its flow rate was too low to meet acceptance criteria.

Three days later, with both units at the same conditions, ESW pump IC was declared inoperable for the same reason ...." Example (2)appears similar to the CNS SW instrument racks situation because The mechanism of corrosion in instrument racks for both divisions of SW does represent a Common-cause Inoperability of Independent Trains or Channels.

However, CNS identified the Division 1 SW Instrument Rack corrosion in March (CR-CNS-2012-01597) and identified the Division 2 SW Instrument Rack corrosion in September (CR-CNS-2012-06208).

Since a point in time prior to the CRs being written cannot be identified when the corrosion became excessive, then the inoperability may be assumed to occur at the time of discovery.

Restoration of Division 1 OPERABILITY in the spring enabled CNS to rely on it during the period of Division 2 inoperability.

Both SW sub-systems were not INOPERABLE at the same time; therefore this condition is not a common cause inperability of 2 independent trains per 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(vii).

Therefore, this condition is NOT REPORTABLE. (elm 10/1/12)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 60 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06208 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: LOSF NA Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 09/18/2012 08:14 Reportability

==

Description:==

No loss of nuclear safety function.

Condition affects safety related equipment, but does not affect ability to perform the safety function.

Licensing has opened an action to itself (CA#2) to review the operability evaluation, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 61 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06209 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/17/2012 18:08 Originator Phone: 2527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/17/2012 18:16 Condition

==

Description:==

HOUSEKEEPING ISSUE IN ECST ROOM Condition:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the area surrounding the Emergency Condensate Storage Tanks. During the walk-by, it was noticed that past ground water intrusion (through the wall) was present. The SWEs commented: "Traces of Ground water Intrusion w/injected foam repair". The SWEs stated that a ground water intrusion spot was previously repaired using injected foam.However, the area was not cleaned following the repair.Requirement not met: Failure to follow CNS housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Initiated Condition Report and Contacted Control Room STE.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that the area be cleaned per CNS housekeeping procedure at next available chance.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code 1 C09 P412 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 62 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06209 Initiated Date: 9/17/2012 18:16 Owner Site and Group: CNS Ops Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/24/2012 10:13 Summary

Description:

HOUSEKEEPING ISSUE IN ECST ROOM Condition:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the area surrounding the Emergency Condensate Storage Tanks. During the walk-by, it was noticed that past ground water intrusion (through the wall) was present. The SWEs commented: "Traces of Ground water Intrusion w/ injected foam repair". The SWEs stated that a ground water intrusion spot was previously repaired using injected foam. However, the area was not cleaned following the repair.Requirement not met: Failure to follow CNS housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Trend. Close CR.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 63 of 291

-'Un tergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06209 I OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/17/2012 20:44 09/17/2012 21:06 Operability

==

Description:==

Walkdowns identified that the ECST area was not cleaned up following maintenance activites.

This is characterized as a housekeeping issue only. No degaraded or non conforming condition is identified.

Approval Comments: Concur.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 64 of 291 Entergy xA S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06209 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Ops Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 65 of 291 Entertgy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06209 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: HOUSEKEEPING Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/18/2012 07:46 Reportability

==

Description:==

No equipment operability, radiological, security nor industrial safety issues that meet criteria for reporting.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 66 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06211 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/17/2012 18:49 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/17/2012 19:01 Condition

==

Description:==

GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING ISSUES.Condition:

It was noticed that there was water pooled on the floor next to SW-P-C and in the back Northwest corner of the SW Pump Room.Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing an Area Walk-By in the Service Water Pump Room.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that the water be cleaned up at the next available opportunity.

TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 PROGRAM FUNCTION P412 CONSEQUENCES C09 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 67 of 291 Entergy ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06211 Initiated Date: 9/17/2012 19:01 Owvner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/24/2012 10:14 Summary

Description:

GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING ISSUES.Condition:

It was noticed that there was water pooled on the floor next to SW-P-C and in the back Northwest corner of the SW Pump Room.Requirement not met: Failure to follow general housekeeping practices.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown Engineers were completing an Area Walk-By in the Service Water Pump Room.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Trend. Close CR.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 68 of 291 OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06211 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/17/2012 22:51 09/18/2012 01:18 Operability

==

Description:==

SW Loop A. LCO 3.7.2.The safety objective of the Service Water (SW) system is to provide a heat sink for the Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC), Residual Heat Removal (RHR), and diesel generator cooling systems under transient and accident conditions.

The system provides a continuous supply of cooling water directly to the diesel generator and to the secondary side of the REC heat exchangers and to the RHR Service Water Booster Pumps adequate for the requirements under both normal operations and under transient and accident conditions.

The system shall be capable of providing direct cooling to essential REC heat loads following an accident or after a passive REC failure.The water originates from the SW pump gland seal leak off which is normal, and from the previously identified SW piping weld leak. The leak rate of the SW piping weld remains bounded by the Operability Evaluation previously completed per CR-CNS-2012-05723.

The leakage is minor and is characterized as a housekeeping issue. SW remains operable.Approval Comments: Concur. Current SW Piping leak rate as documented in the narrative logs shiftly is steady at 5 ml/hour, well below the 5 gpm leakage identified as being acceptable in the evaluation for CR-CNS-2012-05723.

Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 69 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N I S CR-CNS-2012-06211 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 70 of 291

ýEntergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06211 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/18/2012 07:47 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 71 of 291 Entergy I CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06232 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028252527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 10:10 Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 11:18 Condition

==

Description:==

INADEQUATE CONDUIT SUPPORT Condition:

The conduit is associated with LRP-PNL-S191 (SW Pumps A & C Strainer S191 control panel) has a support directly above the panel. The support at the conduit is comprised of a horizontal unistrut which is connected back to a strut multiframe system. The conduit appears to have an excessively long cantilever length and no bracket attaching it to the wall. SWEs were unable to verify from drawings that this configuration required a bracket securing it to the North wall to support the long strut span.The conduit hanger in question was identified as hanger 7. The conduit that is attached to the hanger is ML52 (MLX 31, MLX 30) and the hanger nearest to the one in question is hanger 68. The general conduit layout can be seen on drawing 3169 SHT 1. The individual hanger drawing for hangers 7 and 68 could not be located.Pictures regarding this CR can be found at T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)Requirement not Met: Potentially a failure to provide adequate seismic support for conduit.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the Service Water Pump Room. During the walk-by, the engineers noticed an excessively long cantilever conduit support.Immediate Action

Description:

Condition Report Generated, DED notified, and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that DED be consulted to determine the adequacy of the support. If the support is not adequate, it is recommended that a new support be installed that will extend to, and bolt into the wall.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-6130 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 72 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06232 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 11:18 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/20/2012 15:39 Summary

Description:

INADEQUATE CONDUIT SUPPORT Condition:

The conduit is associated with LRP-PNL-S191 (SW Pumps A & C Strainer S 191 control panel) has a support directly above the panel. The support at the conduit is comprised of a horizontal unistrut which is connected back to a strut multiframe system. The conduit appears to have an excessively long cantilever length and no bracket attaching it to the wall. SWEs were unable to verify from drawings that this configuration required a bracket securing it to the North wall to support the long strut span.The conduit hanger in question was identified as hanger 7. The conduit that is attached to the hanger is ML52 (MLX 31, MLX 30) and the hanger nearest to the one in question is hanger 68. The general conduit layout can be seen on drawing 3169 SHT 1. The individual hanger drawing for hangers 7 and 68 could not be located.Pictures regarding this CR can be found at T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)Requirement not Met: Potentially a failure to provideadequate seismic support for conduit.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the Service Water Pump Room. During the walk-by, the engineers noticed an excessively long cantilever conduit support.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 73 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06232 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Beger,Nathan L Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 are applicable 09/18/2012 17:25 09/18/2012 17:29 The SW System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the diesel generators (DGs) and Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC) System heat exchangers, and to provide a supply of water for the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Heat Exchangers through the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Booster (RHRSWB)System pumps, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The SW System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation.

The SW System also provides cooling water to turbine building non-essential loads. If SW header pressure falls below 20 psig, the system automatically isolates the non-essential header by closing the discharge cross-tie valves. The SW system can be manually aligned as a backup to the REC System through remotely controlled motor operated valves. This configuration would be used in the event that the REC System becomes incapable of performing its essential cooling function and in this configuration the SW System provides cooling water to the room coolers for the Emergency Core Cooling System (Core Spray, RHR, HPCI)pump rooms and the RHR pump seal water coolers.The conduit in question meets the requirements for Seismic class IS equipment per NEDC 88-285. Hangar H-68 is on SKE-EE2279 Sh.4 Rev. 0, NEDC 88-285 analyzed this hangar for a maximum span of 8 ft. 6 in. for Seismic Class IS. Per field walkdown the span for this hangar is 8 ft. which is within the allowable range and is therefore seismaically qualified to Class IS.Div 1 SW remains operable.Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 74 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06232 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 75 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06232 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/19/2012 07:39 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 76 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06238 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 2527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 13:05 Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 13:08 Condition

==

Description:==

SW INSTRUMENT RACK SPACIAL CONCERN Condition:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the Service Water Pump Room. During the walk-by, the SWEs noted a single leg instrument rack for SW-PI-383B that is touching a large pipe. This is an adverse spatial interaction because movement of the large pipe could potentially cause rack damage.A photo of this spacial concern can be found at TAPlant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Adequate space between equipment to allow for seismic movement.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Condition Report Generated, DED notified, and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that DED be consulted to determine if the force on the rack due to the pipe movement during a seismic event is enough to cause a failure of the rack.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 KEYWORDS SEISMIC CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 77 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06238 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 13:08 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/20/2012 15:40 Summary

Description:

SW INSTRUMENT RACK SPACIAL CONCERN Condition:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were performing a walk-by of the Service Water Pump Room. During the walk-by, the SWEs noted a single leg instrument rack for SW-PI-383B that is touching a large pipe. This is an adverse spatial interaction because movement of the large pipe could potentially cause rack damage.A photo of this spacial concern can be found at T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Adequate space between equipment to allow for seismic movement.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 78 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06238 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/18/2012 17:34 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/18/2012 17:37 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 are applicable The SW System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the diesel generators (DGs) and Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC) System heat exchangers, and to provide a supply of water for the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Heat Exchangers through the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Booster (RHRSWB)System pumps, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The SW System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation.

The SW System also provides cooling water to turbine building non-essential loads. If SW header pressure falls below 20 psig, the system automatically isolates the non-essential header by closing the discharge cross-tie valves. The SW system can be manually aligned as a backup to the REC System through remotely controlled motor operated valves. This configuration would be used in the event that the REC System becomes incapable of performing its essential cooling function and in this configuration the SW System provides cooling water to the room coolers for the Emergency Core Cooling System (Core Spray, RHR, HPCI)pump rooms and the RHR pump seal water coolers.The PI is essential as a pressure boundary only. It is normally valved out of service by its isolation valve. It current condition is valved out. Seismic interaction with the SW pipe insulation is not a concern as the rack is attached to the same structure as the piping. The rack and piping will not move independently during a postulated seismic event, they will move together.

This condition does not affect DIV 2 SW operability or the operability of the valve out instrument.

Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 79 of 291 Entg A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06238 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 80 of 291 EnteI I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06238 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: McCutchen,Edward L Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/19/2012 07:47 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 81 of 291 Entegy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06246 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 13:37 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 13:53 Condition

==

Description:==

TUBING TRAY MISSING BOLTS Condition:

Tubing trays to rack LR-25-58 have several connections where one of the two screws per side of the tray connectors are loose or missing. Since each connector has at least one screw secured tightly per side, the overall tubing tray system is acceptable per Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWE).Pictures of the tubing tray can be found at T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not Met: Tubing tray bolting loose and/or missing.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the Reactor building NE-Quad 881 elevation.

Immediate Action

Description:

Condition Report Generated and contacted Supervisor and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that the loose and missing bolting in the tubing tray be tightened and replaced at the next available opportunity.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 82 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06246 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 13:53 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 9/25/2012 13:13 Summary

Description:

TUBING TRAY MISSING BOLTS Condition:

Tubing trays to rack LR-25-58 have several connections where one of the two screws per side of the tray connectors are loose or missing. Since each connector has at least one screw secured tightly per side, the overall tubing tray system is acceptable per Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWE).Pictures of the tubing tray can be found at T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not Met: Tubing tray bolting loose and/or missing.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the Reactor building NE-Quad 881 elevation.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 83 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06246 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/19/2012 15:28 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/19/2012 15:48 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.5.1 and 3.5.3 apply The RCIC System is designed to operate either automatically or manually following reactor pressure vessel (RPV) isolation accompanied by a loss of coolant flow from the feedwater system to provide adequate core cooling and control of the RPV water level. The RCIC System is designed to provide core cooling for a wide range of steam inlet pressures, 150 to 1120 psia. Upon receipt of an initiation signal, the RCIC turbine accelerates to a specified speed. As the RCIC flow increases, the turbine control valve is automatically adjusted to maintain design flow. Exhaust steam from the RCIC turbine is discharged to the suppression pool. The function of the RCIC System is to respond to transient events by providing makeup coolant to the reactor. The RCIC System is neither an ECCS nor an Engineered Safety Feature System and no credit is taken in the safety analyses for RCIC System operation.

It can, however, provide a high pressure backup to supply water to the vessel in the event of a system break.The Core Spray system is designed to maintain continuity of reactor core cooling for the spectrum of loss-of-coolant accidents ranging from those for which adequate core cooling is supplied by the High Pressure Coolant Injection system up to and including the design basis Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA).Tubing tray is based on B-Line catalog for 1-1/2" by 3/4" high by 16' long, 16 gauge tray bounding dimension with 2 copper 1/2" tubing runs being supported.

The support is one 1/4" by 3/4" A36 bolt. The total weight being supported by the bolt is estimated to be 16 lbs. This equates to the most bounding seismic loading of 21 lbs of shear force and a 110 psi of shear stress on the bolt. The allowable shear stress for the bolt is 14,400 psi. A single bolt is adequate to meet all seismic requirements.

RCIC AND CS-A operability is not challenged by this condition.

Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 84 of 291 Entegy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06246 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 85 of 291

ýErztergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06246 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/24/2012 07:35 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 86 of 291 Etgy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06253 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028252527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 15:50 Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 15:58 Condition

==

Description:==

FIRE SEAL MISSING LABEL Condition:

It was noticed the CIC tag for fire seal BLDG-FSEAL-R3B16E in Critical Switchgear Room 1G is missing.Requirement not Met: Plant components should be properly labeled per procedure 0.35.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in Critical Switchgear Room IG when they noticed that the CIC tag is missing.Immediate Action

Description:

Condition Report Generated and contacted Supervisor and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that the CIC tag for fire seal BLDG-FSEAL-R3B16E be rehung at the next available opportunity.

TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS LABEL REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C02 PROGRAM FUNCTION P108 Attachments:

Condition Description Missing Fire Seal Label Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 87 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06253 CA Number: I Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS Ops Mgmt CNS Ops AOM Sup Staff CNS] Name I Dewhirst,Linda Penfield,Rod L Ashbridge,Ronald J Originated By: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/20/2012 15:49:18 Performed By: Goodman,Daniel J 10/4/2012 15:03:33 Subperformed By: Ashbridge,Ronald J 10/1/2012 10:59:21 Approved By: Closed By: Goodman,Daniel J 10/4/2012 15:03:33 Current Due Date: 10/19/2012 CA Type: ENHANCE Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Resolve Identified Condition.

Initial Due Date: CA Priority: 10/19/2012 CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Tvye Code Description PRIORITY 4 Response: concur with closure. Label request is appropriate and has its own process to drive completion of activity Subresponse

I have filled out the label request with the originator of this notifiacation as the requestor.

Once the label is fabricated, it will be forwarded to this engineer for installation be 0.35 and will be verified by operations.

Procedure 0.35 addresses missing CIC labels. A notification is not requried for this condition.

Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 88 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06253 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 15:58 Owner Site and Group: CNS Ops Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

E Closed by: Summary

Description:

FIRE SEAL MISSING LABEL Condition:

It was noticed the CIC tag for fire seal BLDG-FSEAL-R3B16E in Critical Switchgear Room 1 G is missing.Requirement not Met: Plant components should be properly labeled per procedure 0.35.Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in Critical Switchgear Room 1 G when they noticed that the CIC tag is missing.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 89 of 291

'Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06253 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/18/2012 16:06 09/18/2012 16:27 Operability

==

Description:==

Labels are not considered installed plant equipment.

This issue is administrative in nature and documented for tracking purposes.

The condition described does not affect the operability of any equipment required by the TS/TRM, does not affect risk significant SSCs modeled in Maintenance Rule, and does not affect required support functions per the UFSAR or other LBDs. The condition described in the CR does not meet the criteria specified by G.O.P. 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 for an event or condition immediately reportable to the NRC.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 90 of 291 Entergy I A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06253 Version: 1 Significance Code: E Classification Code: DD Owner Site and Group: CNS Ops Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 91 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06253 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: ADMIN Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/19/2012 07:48 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is a equipment labeling issue and does not involve an equipment, radiological, nor security issue.Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 92 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06256 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 16:08 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 16:11 Condition

==

Description:==

Substance/Rust found on RHR-MOV-MO25A During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, RHR-MOV-MO25A and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, a substance that appears to look like extensive rusting was found on the RHR-MOV-MO25A.

The substance was located on the valve stem inside the yoke assembly.

Refer to the attached pdf for pictures of the associated area.Requirements Not Met: This substance does not belong on the exterior of the valve.Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

A review of previous CR's using keywords M025A and rust were performed on PCRS to find relevant previously evaluated CR's. No CR's were found that document this particular event but CR-CNS-2004-02326 was found discussing rust on M025B. After searching PCRS, this CR was generated.

Suggested Action

Description:

The substance should be identified and corrective actions created to stop and prevent this issue from occurring.

EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name MOV-MO25A Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code 1 I RHR TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code P501 Attachments:

Immediate Action Description M025A Rust Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 93 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06256 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 16:11 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 9/20/2012 13:12 Summary

Description:

Substance/Rust found on RJIR-MOV-MO25A During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, RHR-MOV-MO25A and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, a substance that appears to look like extensive rusting was found on the RHR-MOV-MO25A.

The substance was located on the valve stem inside the yoke assembly.

Refer to the attached pdf for pictures of the associated area.Requirements Not Met: This substance does not belong on the exterior of the valve.Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Pane 94 of 291

ýEntergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06256 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C 09/18/2012 22:58 Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/19/2012 02:08 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.5.1 RHR The ECCS is designed, in conjunction with the primary and secondary containment, to limit the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a loss of coolant accident (LOCA). The ECCS uses two independent methods (flooding and spraying) to cool the core during a LOCA. The ECCS network consists of the High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) System, the Core Spray (CS) System, the low pressure coolant injection (LPCI) mode of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System, and the Automatic Depressurization System (ADS). The suppression pool provides the required source of water for the ECCS. The emergency condensate storage tanks (ECSTs) are capable of providing a source of water for the HPCI System. Although no credit is taken in the safety analyses for the condensate storage tank (CST), it is capable of providing a source of water for the CS System and LPCI subsystems.

On receipt of an initiation signal, ECCS pumps automatically start; simultaneously, the system aligns and the pumps inject water, taken either from the ECSTs or suppression pool, into the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) as RCS pressure is overcome by the discharge pressure of the ECCS pumps. Although the system is initiated, ADS action is delayed, allowing the operator to interrupt the timed sequence if the system is not needed. The HPCI pump discharge pressure almost immediately exceeds that of the RCS, and the pump injects coolant into the vessel to cool the core. If the break is small, the HPCI System will maintain coolant inventory as well as vessel level while the RCS is still pressurized.

If HPCI fails, it is backed up by ADS in combination with LPCI and CS. In this event, if the ADS timed sequence is allowed to time out, the selected safety/relief valves (SRVs) would open, depressurizing the RCS, thus allowing the LPCI and CS to overcome RCS pressure and inject coolant into the vessel. If the break is large, RCS pressure initially drops rapidly and the LPCI and CS cool the core.RHR-M025A is the inboard RHR injection isolation valve.Surface rust is evident on the valve externals.

The rust is not impacting the valve stem. Review of recent IST stroke times of RHR-25A indicates no degradation.

RHR-M025A operability is not affected by this condition and RHR remains operable.Approval Comments: Concur.Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 95 of 291

ýEntergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06256 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 96 of 291 EntergI REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06256 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: McCutchen,Edward L 09/19/2012 08:02 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 97 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06257 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Phone: 4028255724 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 16:11 Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 16:12 Condition

==

Description:==

Conduit found to close to RHR-MOV-MO25A During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, RHR-MOV-MO25A and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, it was found that a piece of conduit was approximately

0.5 inches

from the valve stem housing assembly.

Refer to the attached pdf for pictures of the associated area. After reviewing the positioning of the conduit it was found that no extensive damage would occur during a seismic event which would impair the operability of the valve. The conduit could potentially be damaged during the event which would cause it to be dented.Requirements Not Met: Potential seismic concern associated with this interaction which should be analyzed.Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

A review of previous CR's using keywords M025A and conduit were performed on PCRS to find relevant previously evaluated CR's. No CR's were found. After searching PCRS, this CR was generated.

Suggested Action

Description:

The movement during a seismic event of the conduit and valve should be reviewed to determine the necessary distance that the conduit should be moved. If movement is not available, supports to restrain either component during a seismic event should be looked into.REFERENCE ITEMS: Tyve Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P302 REPORT WEIGHT 1 Attachments:

Immediate Action Description M025A Conduit Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 98 of 291 EnteWg I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06257 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 16:12 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: HathawayTricia D 9/25/2012 14:23 Summary

Description:

Conduit found to close to RHR-MOV-MO25A During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, RHR-MOV-MO25A and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, it was found that a piece of conduit was approximately

0.5 inches

from the valve stem housing assembly.

Refer to the attached pdf for pictures of the associated area. After reviewing the positioning of the conduit it was found that no extensive damage would occur during a seismic event which would impair the operability of the valve. The conduit could potentially be damaged during the event which would cause it to be dented.Requirements Not Met: Potential seismic concern associated with this interaction which should be analyzed.Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 99 of 291

[ Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06257 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/19/2012 13:08 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/19/2012 15:03 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO?s 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.6.2.3, 3.9.7, 3.9.8 and TLCO T3.6.1 potentially apply The safety design bases of the RHR system are to: 1. Restore and maintain the coolant inventory in the reactor vessel after a loss of coolant accident as required for core cooling in conjunction with other Emergency Core Cooling systems (Low Pressure Coolant Injection Mode, LPCI).2. Provide cooling for the suppression pool and thereby remove heat from the containment following a loss of coolant accident to reduce containment pressure (either Suppression Pool Cooling Mode or spray mode can be used to accomplish this function).

3. Maintain suppression pool temperature during normal operation to within the limits assumed in the "Station Safety Analysis," (USAR Chapter XIV).4. The suppression pool is the source of water for the LPCI mode of operation of the RHR system in order to provide a complete recycle path for water lost from the reactor vessel following reflooding.

5. To provide a high degree of assurance that the RHR system operates satisfactorily during a loss of coolant accident, each active component shall be capable of being tested during operation of the nuclear system.6. Provide cooling for the drywell and thereby remove heat from the primary containment following a loss of coolant accident to reduce containment temperature.

The power generation design bases of the RHR SDC function is to remove residual heat from the nuclear system so that refueling and nuclear system servicing can be performed.

Per drawing RH-H120A and RH-S20, the maximum calculated displacement that will occur on the piping/valve is 0.375".this is the most limiting load case calculated in the analysis for movement of the piping/valve.

The current 0.5" clearance is sufficient to preclude seismic interaction.

All equipment remains operable.Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 100 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06257 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 09/24/2012 10:06 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 101 of 291 REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06257 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/20/2012 07:36 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 102 of 291 I EtgyI CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06260 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 16:34 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 17:08 Condition

==

Description:==

HOUSEKEEPING ISSUE Condition:

Retractable gate posts and a filter assembly skid was found under the stairs that lead up to the MPF 923?-5?elevation.

Requirement not Met: Items not stored in their proper locations.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the MPF for EE-XFMR-RPS lB.Immediate Action

Description:

Condition Report Generated and contacted Supervisor and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that the items be stored in their proper locations.

TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code 1 C09 P412 Attachments:

Condition Description Misc. Items Under Stairs Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 103 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06260 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 17:08 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/24/2012 10:22 Summary

Description:

HOUSEKEEPING ISSUE Condition:

Retractable gate posts and a filter assembly skid was found under the stairs that lead up to the MPF 923?-5?elevation.

Requirement not Met: Items not stored in their proper locations.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the MPF for EE-XFMR-RPS I B.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Trend. Close CR.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 104 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06260 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: NOT REQUIRED Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/18/2012 19:54 09/19/2012 02:11 Operability

==

Description:==

No Technical Specification specified SSCs and no SSCs discussed in the definition of Functionality are affected by this condition.

OPERABILITY is Not Required per procedure 0.5.OPS. There is no immediate reportability associated with this issue per procedure 2.0.5 or NUREG 1022.Approval Comments: Concur.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 105 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N I S CR-CNS-2012-06260 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 08:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 106 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06260 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: HOUSEKEEPING Performed By: Madsen,David N 09/19/2012 08:03 Reportability

==

Description:==

No equipment operability, radiological, security nor industrial safety issues that meet criteria for reporting.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Paue 107 of 291 I I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06264 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 09/18/2012 18:04 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/18/2012 18:06 Condition

==

Description:==

REC-MOV-697MV appears to be leaking oil During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, REC-MOV-697MV and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, a substance that appears to be oil was found leaking out of REC-MOV-697MV.

Refer to the attached pdf for picture of the associated area.Requirements Not Met: Oil should not be leaking out of valves. D Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

A review of previous CR's using keywords 697MV with oil or leak was performed on PCRS to find relevant previously evaluated CR's. No CR's were found that document this particular event. After searching PCRS, this CR was generated.

Suggested Action

Description:

Determine the source of the oil like substance and provide a means of repair.Attachments:

Condition Description Leaking Valve Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 108 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06264 Initiated Date: 9/18/2012 18:06 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 9/19/2012 12:43 Summary

Description:

REC-MOV-697MV appears to be leaking oil During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns on 9/18/12 being performed as a result of the incident in Japan, REC-MOV-697MV and the surrounding area were reviewed to determine whether or not there were any potential seismic issues. During the walkdown, a substance that appears to be oil was found leaking out of REC-MOV-697MV.

Refer to the attached pdf for picture of the associated area.Requirements Not Met: Oil should not be leaking out of valves. LI Method of Discovery:

During the Beyond Design Basis Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 109 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06264 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C 09/19/2012 01:27 Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/19/2012 01:31 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.7.3 REC The REC System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the room coolers for the core spray pump rooms, RHR pump rooms, and HPCI pump room, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient and the RHR pump seal water coolers (essential loads). The REC System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation (non-essential loads). In the event of a loss of REC System pressure, automatic valving is provided to shut off all supply to nonessential loads, thus assuring supply to the essential loads.The REC System consists of two subsystems, each consisting of two 1350 gpm pumps, a heat exchanger, valves, piping and associated instrumentation.

A 550 gallon capacity surge tank, located at the highest point of the system, accommodates system volume changes, maintains static pressure in the loops to ensure adequate net positive suction head (NPSH), detects gross leaks in the REC System by providing a point to monitor inventory, and provides a means for adding water. Either of the two subsystems with one REC pump operating or the Service Water supply, is capable of providing the required cooling capacity to support the required essential systems. The two subsystems have sufficient redundancy and independence from each other such that no active component failure in one subsystem will affect the OPERABILITY of the other.Additionally, each subsystem is provided with Service Water supply and return valves to provide required component cooling in the event of REC leakage in excess of limits or a passive failure, such as a Class IE pipe break.The Service Water (SW) System provides two subsystems for backup to the REC critical loops. The Service Water supply is a fully qualified essential supply to the REC critical loops. This configuration would be used in the event that the REC system becomes incapable of performing its essential cooling function.

Because of the cross-tie capability in the critical REC loops either SW backup subsystem can supply the required cooling to the REC System.REC-M0697 is the North REC Critical Loop Return valve. This valve is normally open to provide REC return flow and can be closed to allow SW to cross tie to REC.Discussion with Valve Team Supervision identified that the MOV is lubricated with grease. Any noted seepage is insignificant as the grease is a colloidal substance that does not flow like oil. A review of the IST data taken per 6.REC.201 for REC-M0697 shows no degradation over time for the valve stroke times. REC-M0697 and the REC system remain operable.Approval Comments: Concur.Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 110 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06264 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

09/19/2012 11:11 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 111 of 291

'Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06264 I Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/19/2012 08:02 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 112 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06294 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/19/2012 13:05 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/19/2012 13:12 Condition

==

Description:==

DWG INCONSISTENT WITH PLANT CONFIGURATION Condition:

Drawing 127857 Rev. B SHT. 1 of 2 shows anchor bolts in six places for EE-XFMR-CDP1A and EE-XMFR-CDP1B.

This drawing also states "AS-BUILT," however, the AS-BUILT configuration is not the same as the drawing. The units have four 5/8" shell anchors in the field, which is consistent with the seismic anchorage calculation as developed for the IPEEE program.Requirement not Met: Drawings should match plant configurations.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walkdown of EE-XFMR-CDP lB.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Update drawing 127857 to show four anchor bolts which is consistent with field conditions and calculations.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type KEYWORDS REPORT WEIGHT CONSEQUENCES PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code DRAWING DEFICIENCY 1 C02 P316 Attachments:

Condition Description EE-XMFR-CDP 1B PICTS Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 113 of 291 Entergy ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06294 Initiated Date: 9/19/2012 13:12 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/25/2012 14:23 Summary

Description:

DWG INCONSISTENT WITH PLANT CONFIGURATION Condition:

Drawing 127857 Rev. B SHT. 1 of 2 shows anchor bolts in six places for EE-XFMR-CDP1A and EE-XMFR-CDP1B.

This drawing also states "AS-BUILT," however, the AS-BUILT configuration is not the same as the drawing. The units have four 5/8" shell anchors in the field, which is consistent with the seismic anchorage calculation as developed for the IPEEE program.Requirement not Met: Drawings should match plant configurations.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walkdown of EE-XFMR-CDP 1 B.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 114 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06294 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/19/2012 15:21 09/19/2012 15:39 Operability

==

Description:==

This issue is administrative in nature and documented for tracking purposes.

The condition described does not affect the operability of any equipment required by the TS/TRM, does not affect risk significant SSCs modeled in Maintenance Rule, and does not affect required support functions per the UFSAR or other LBDs. The condition described in the CR does not meet the criteria specified by G.O.P. 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 for an event or condition immediately reportable to the NRC.Any specific equipment conditions discovered will have separate CRs written with operability assessed on that specific notification.

Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 115 of 291 Ent,-t,,7 A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06294 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 09/24/2012 10:06 Engineering Evaluation 12-E08 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 116 of 291

.Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06294 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: DOCUMENTATION Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 09/24/2012 07:45 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is an issue of proper documentation and does not introduce or identify an equipment, radiological nor security problem.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 117 of 291 I Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06304 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/19/2012 15:33 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/19/2012 15:46 Condition

==

Description:==

MINOR SURFACE RUST Condition:

Service water hanger SW-H234A in the Reactor Building 903 elevation was found to have some minor surface rust.Requirement not Met: Hanger should be painted to protect it from corrosion.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the area of SW-MOV-888MV.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and Control Room STE notified.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend that the surface rust is ground off and the hanger then be painted at the next available opportunity.

EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name HANGER Tagl Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code SW TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code P501 Attachments:

Condition Description SW-H234A SW-H234A DWG Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 118 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06304 Initiated Date: 9/19/2012 15:46 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 9/25/2012 13:27 Summary

Description:

MINOR SURFACE RUST Condition:

Service water hanger SW-H234A in the Reactor Building 903 elevation was found to have some minor surface rust.Requirement not Met: Hanger should be painted to protect it from corrosion.

Method of Discovery:

During the 50.54(F) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs)were performing a walk-by in the area of SW-MOV-888MV.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 119 of 291 Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06304 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/19/2012 16:02 09/19/2012 16:05 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 are applicable The SW System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the diesel generators (DGs) and Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC) System heat exchangers, and to provide a supply of water for the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Heat Exchangers through the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Booster (RHRSWB)System pumps, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The SW System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation.

The SW System also provides cooling water to turbine building non-essential loads. If SW header pressure falls below 20 psig, the system automatically isolates the non-essential header by closing the discharge cross-tie valves. The SW system can be manually aligned as a backup to the REC System through remotely controlled motor operated valves. This configuration would be used in the event that the REC System becomes incapable of performing its essential cooling function and in this configuration the SW System provides cooling water to the room coolers for the Emergency Core Cooling System (Core Spray, RHR, HPCI)pump rooms and the RHR pump seal water coolers.Surface rust is a cosmetic issue only. It does not affect the structural integrity of the hangar and therefore does not challenge SW system operability.

SW remains operable.Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 120 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06304 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/20/2012 10:01 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 121 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06304 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L Reportability

==

Description:==

SW System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/24/2012 07:55 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 122 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06312 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028252527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/19/2012 17:22 Initiated Date: 09/19/2012 17:29 Condition

==

Description:==

CABINET SEISMIC INTERACTION WITH LIGHT Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Diesel Generator Room 2. During the walk-by it was observed that a chain hung lighting fixture is in close proximity to the upper sheet steel extension of Switchgear Cabinet EE-SWGR-4160DG2.

The extension appears to be attached to the cabinet. There is a potential for seismic interaction since the light fixture could sway which could potentially impact the cabinet. This issue is also present with Switchgear Cabinet EE-SWGR-416ODG 1.Design civil was consulted and approximated that the impact force of the light on the cabinet could reach 30lbs. Design electrical was consulted and reviewed the equipment within the cabinet. Their review yielded that the loss of relays contained within the cabinet will not impact safe shutdown.

As the impact force is not enough to cause damage to the cabinets there is no condition.

Requirement not met: None, the light fixture holds the potential to impact the extension atop the cabinets but no further adverse condition is expected from this action.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

No action necessary.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Attachments:

Condition Description Switchgear Cabinet Picts Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 123 of 291 Entergy ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06312 Initiated Date: 9/19/2012 17:29 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/25/2012 14:23 Summary

Description:

CABINET SEISMIC INTERACTION WITH LIGHT Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Diesel Generator Room 2. During the walk-by it was observed that a chain hung lighting fixture is in close proximity to the upper sheet steel extension of Switchgear Cabinet EE-SWGR-4160DG2.

The extension appears to be attached to the cabinet. There is a potential for seismic interaction since the light fixture could sway which could potentially impact the cabinet. This issue is also present with Switchgear Cabinet EE-SWGR-4160DGI.

Design civil was consulted and approximated that the impact force of the light on the cabinet could reach 30lbs. Design electrical was consulted and reviewed the equipment within the cabinet. Their review yielded that the loss of relays contained within the cabinet will not impact safe shutdown.

As the impact force is not enough to cause damage to the cabinets there is no condition.

Requirement not met: None, the light fixture holds the potential to impact the extension atop the cabinets but no further adverse condition is expected from this action.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 124 of 291 Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06312 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Wheeler,Steven C 09/19/2012 21:16 Approved By: Kahanca,John R 09/20/2012 01:22 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.1 Each DG must be capable of starting, accelerating to rated speed and voltage, and connecting to its respective 4.16 kV critical bus on detection of bus undervoltage.

This sequence must be accomplished within 14 seconds. Each DG must also be capable of accepting required loads within the assumed loading sequence intervals, and must continue to operate until offsite power can be restored to the ESF buses. These capabilities are required to be met from a variety of initial conditions, such as DG in standby with the engine hot and DG in standby with the engine at ambient condition.

Proper sequencing of loads, including load shedding, is a required function for DG OPERABILITY.

USAR 11.5.2.4 Application of Design Earthquake Criteria.The characteristics of the selected design earthquakes are given in Table II 5 1. The Maximum Possible Design Earthquake previously referred to is now termed the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE). The Maximum Probable Design Earthquake is the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE). The seismic design for Class I structures and equipment is based on dynamic analyses using acceleration response spectrum curves which are based on a ground motion of 0. 1g. This OBE ground acceleration corresponds to an intensity of MM VI. The combined stresses resulting from dead, live, pressure, thermal and earthquake having a ground acceleration of 0.2g are applied to Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) that are necessary to achieve safe shutdown.

This SSE ground acceleration corresponds to an intensity of MM VII.For the design of Class I structures and equipment, the maximum horizontal and vertical accelerations were considered to occur simultaneously.

Where applicable, stresses were added directly.The DG output breaker functions to connect the DG to the respective critical 4160 bus.Design civil was consulted and approximated that the impact force of the light on the cabinet could reach 30lbs. Design electrical was consulted and reviewed the equipment within the cabinet. Their review yielded that the loss of relays contained within the cabinet will not impact safe shutdown.

As the impact force is not enough to cause damage to the cabinets there is no condition.

Based on there being no impact to safe shutdown equipment, safe shutdown functions are not affected.Based on the robust construction of the cabinet and Civil Engineering's conservative estimate that the force of impact to the DG cabinet by the lamp would only be 30 lbs, no affect on the ability of the breaker to open or close as needed is expected.EDG operability is not affected by this condition.

Approval Comments: Concur.Attachments:

Operability Description Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 125 of 291

ýEntergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06312 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 09/24/2012 10:06 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 126 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06312 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: McCutchen,Edward L 09/24/2012 08:04 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 127 of 291 Et lI CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06332 Originator:

Nienaber, Matthew Originator Phone: 4028255639 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Analysis Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Van Winkle,Marshall B Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/20/2012 13:00 Initiated Date: 09/20/2012 13:06 Condition

==

Description:==

LOOSE BOLT ON SUPPORT FOR SW VALVES IN DG2 ROOM Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Diesel Generator Room 2. During the walk-by it was observed that one of two anchor bolts which secure a bracket to the concrete wall for a valve manifold (associated with Valves SW-1350, SW-1351, SW-1353 and SW-1354) has loosened.The bolt head projects approximately 1/2 inch from the bracket surface.Drawing 2077 provides a flow diagram for the parts. Their purpose is for calibration of a low indicator on the SW discharge piping. SAP rates them as essential as they provide a pressure boundary for SW. Design I&C was contacted and concurred that their essential status is due to the components being a pressure boundary.

All components are absent from the SSEL and have no ranking for criticality in SAP. The shear and tensile strength of a single 1/4" bolt can at worst be 400 lbs and 397 lbs respectively.

The worst seismic loading in the building is 6g's. With an estimated equipment weight of 30lbs and conservatively accounting for unknown multimodal effects this gives a seismic loading of 2701bs, far below the 400 that is allowable. (Realistically the bolts are stronger, the seismic acceleration is .4g and the equipment weight is closer to 10lbs).Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and STE Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that both bolts be tightened in accordance with plant procedures.

EQUIPMENT:

Ta Name Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code SW TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Attachments:

Immediate Action Description pictures of loose bolt Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 128 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06332 Initiated Date: 9/20/2012 13:06 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 9/26/2012 15:30 Summary

Description:

LOOSE BOLT ON SUPPORT FOR SW VALVES IN DG2 ROOM Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Diesel Generator Room 2. During the walk-by it was observed that one of two anchor bolts which secure a bracket to the concrete wall for a valve manifold (associated with Valves SW-1350, SW-1351, SW-1353 and SW-1354) has loosened.The bolt head projects approximately 1/2 inch from the bracket surface.Drawing 2077 provides a flow diagram for the parts. Their purpose is for calibration of a low indicator on the SW discharge piping. SAP rates them as essential as they provide a pressure boundary for SW. Design I&C was contacted and concurred that their essential status is due to the components being a pressure boundary.

All components are absent from the SSEL and have no ranking for criticality in SAP. The shear and tensile strength of a single 1/4" bolt can at worst be 400 lbs and 397 lbs respectively.

The worst seismic loading in the building is 6g's. With an estimated equipment weight of 30lbs and conservatively accounting for unknown multimodal effects this gives a seismic loading of 2701bs, far below the 400 that is allowable. (Realistically the bolts are stronger, the seismic acceleration is .4g and the equipment weight is closer to l0lbs).Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 129 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06332 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/20/2012 13:50 Approved By: Beger,Nathan L 09/20/2012 14:37 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.1, 3.8.2 The onsite standby power source for 4.16 kV critical buses IF and 1G consists of two DGs. DG-1 and DG-2 are dedicated to critical buses IF and IG, respectively.

A DG starts automatically on a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) signal (i.e., low reactor water level signal or high drywell pressure signal) or on a critical bus degraded voltage or undervoltage signal.After the DG has started, it automatically ties to its respective bus after offsite power is tripped as a consequence of critical bus undervoltage or degraded voltage, independent of or coincident with a LOCA signal. The DGs also start and operate in the standby mode without tying to the critical bus on a LOCA signal alone. Following the trip of offsite power, all loads are shed from the critical bus. When the DG is tied to the critical bus, loads are then sequentially connected to its respective critical bus. The sequencing logic controls the permissive and starting signals to motor breakers to prevent overloading the DG.Drawing 2077 provides a flow diagram for the parts. Their purpose is for calibration of a low indicator on the SW discharge piping. SAP rates them as essential as they provide a pressure boundary for SW. Design I&C was contacted and concurred that their essential status is due to the components being a pressure boundary.

All components are absent from the SSEL and have no ranking for criticality in SAP. The shear and tensile strength of a single 1/4" bolt can at worst be 400 lbs and 397 lbs respectively.

The worst seismic loading in the building is 6g's. With an estimated equipment weight of 30lbs and conservatively accounting for unknown multimodal effects this gives a seismic loading of 2701bs, far below the 400 that is allowable. (In reality, the bolts are 3/8 in diameter (1/4 in bolts were used as an absolute worst case), the seismic acceleration is .4g and the equipment weight is closer to 10lbs).This condition has no effect on DG-2 operability.

Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 130 of 291 Ente;gy A S S I G N M E N I S CR-CNS-2012-06332 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 (Cat C)09/26/2012 07:08 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 131 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06332 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 09/24/2012 08:24 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 132 of 291 Entgy I CONDITION REPORT ICR-CNS-2012-06467 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028253620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 08:46 Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 12:36 Condition

==

Description:==

EQ BOX NOT PROPERLY MOUNTED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys.During the area walk-by, it was observed that EQ box TB- 1210 is not attached to bent with bottom tabs. The top of EQ Box TB-1210 has tabs attached to a b-line strut on the bent in Reactor Building 881-NE-Torus.

Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\The EQ Box TB-1210 is assumed to be an 8" wide x 10" long x 4" deep electrical box conservatively assumed to weigh 25 lbs including the attached cables. The top connections of the box are connected to a 1-5/8" unistrut by a 1/4" diameter, 20 threads per inch, bolts. These bolts are listed to have an allowable pullout of 600 lbs per nut and a resistance to slip of 300 lbs. The worst seismic loading at the elevation of the reactor building is 4 g's. With an estimated weight of 25 lbs and conservatively accounting for multimodal effects by increasing the loading by 1.5, this gives a seismic loading of 150 lbs.The bolted connection to the unistrut can resist 300 lbs per bolt for shear shipping and 600 lbs per bolt for tensile pullout of the unistrut.

the 150 lbs seismic loading is far below the allowables.

We have two bolts connecting the box, the actual acceleration value is realistically under lg and the actual weight is less than 25 lbs.Requirement not met: Having only the top two tabs attached is not in accordance with seismic mounting for this box.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Supervisor and Shift Technical Engineer in the control room.Suggested Action

Description:

Tabs at the bottom of box should be secured.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 133 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06467 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 12:36 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/2/2012 10:24 Summary

Description:

EQ BOX NOT PROPERLY MOUNTED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys.During the area walk-by, it was observed that EQ box TB- 1210 is not attached to bent with bottom tabs. The top of EQ Box TB-1210 has tabs attached to a b-line strut on the bent in Reactor Building 881-NE-Torus.

Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\The EQ Box TB-1210 is assumed to be an 8" wide x 10" long x 4" deep electrical box conservatively assumed to weigh 25 lbs including the attached cables. The top connections of the box are connected to a 1-5/8" unistrut by a 1/4" diameter, 20 threads per inch, bolts. These bolts are listed to have an allowable pullout of 600 lbs per nut and a resistance to slip of 300 lbs. The worst seismic loading at the elevation of the reactor building is 4 g's. With an estimated weight of 25 lbs and conservatively accounting for multimodal effects by increasing the loading by 1.5, this gives a seismic loading of 150 lbs.The bolted connection to the unistrut can resist 300 lbs per bolt for shear shipping and 600 lbs per bolt for tensile pullout of the unistrut.

the 150 lbs seismic loading is far below the allowables.

We have two bolts connecting the box, the actual acceleration value is realistically under Ig and the actual weight is less than 25 lbs.Requirement not met: Having only the top two tabs attached is not in accordance with seismic mounting for this box.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 134 of 291

ýEntergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06467 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle 09/26/2012 16:15 Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/26/2012 22:07 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.7.3 and 3.7.2 are applicable The REC System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the room coolers for the core spray pump rooms, RHIR pump rooms, and HPCI pump room, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient, and the RHR pump seal water coolers (essential loads). The REC System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation (non-essential loads). In the event of a loss of REC System pressure, automatic valve operation is provided to shut off all REC supply to nonessential loads, thus assuring REC is supplied to the essential loads. The Service Water (SW) System provides two subsystems for backup to the REC critical loops. The Service Water supply is a fully qualified essential supply to the REC critical loops. This configuration would be used in the event that the REC system becomes incapable of performing its essential cooling function.

Because of the cross-tie capability in the critical REC loops either SW backup subsystem can supply the required cooling to the REC System.The SW System is designed to provide cooling water for the removal of heat from equipment, such as the diesel generators (DGs) and Reactor Equipment Cooling (REC) System heat exchangers, and to provide a supply of water for the Residual Heat Removal Service Water Heat Exchangers through the Residual Heat Removal Service Water (RHRSW) System pumps, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The SW System also provides cooling to unit components, as required, during normal operation.

The SW System also provides cooling water to turbine building non-essential loads. If SW header pressure falls below 20 psig, the system automatically isolates the non-essential header by closing the discharge cross-tie valves.TB-1210 contains wiring associated with SW-SOV-SPV-451.

Per discussions with DED NEDC 00-50 Rev 1 this box was installed per CED 2000-0115 and is installed correctly per these documents.

Thus, no degraded or non-conforming condition exists. The Service Water and REC systems are Operable for this condition.

Per 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description checklist checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 135 of 291 Entegy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06467 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/01/2012 10:32 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 136 of 291 Entegy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06467 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/27/2012 09:10 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 137 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT TCR-CNS-2012-06491 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 16:41 Originator Phone: 4028253620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 16:58 Condition

==

Description:==

MISSING SHEET METAL SCREWS Condition:

Missing sheet metal screws on top of 9-4 control room panels and nearby panels. Each side has at least one screw out of the three. By engineering review, one screw is sufficient to support the dead load of the panel which is used to vent heat from the components inside. Pictures located in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\ under CR folder.Requirement not met: All screws should be in place to provide redundant support of the panel.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of the 9-4 Panel in the control room.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted operators in control room.Suggested Action

Description:

Replace missing screws.EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name PNL- 9-4 Tag Suffix Name Comoonent Code Process System Code 2 9 LRP Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 138 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06491 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 16:58 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 10/1/2012 12:02 Summary

Description:

MISSING SHEET METAL SCREWS Condition:

Missing sheet metal screws on top of 9-4 control room panels and nearby panels. Each side has at least one screw out of the three. By engineering review, one screw is sufficient to support the dead load of the panel which is used to vent heat from the components inside. Pictures located in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\ under CR folder.Requirement not met: All screws should be in place to provide redundant support of the panel.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of the 9-4 Panel in the control room.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 139 of 291

.Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06491 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/26/2012 21:30 09/26/2012 22:58 Operability

==

Description:==

There are no specific tech specs associated with this issue.The panels in question are panels associated with th annunciator system which itself is non-essential.

Operability with respect to seismic considerations is not challenged by this condition.

The panels are normally held on by nine (9) sheet metal screws. No panel has less than six (6) screws currently installed and are adequately restrained.

No equipment operability issues exist with respect to this condition.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 140 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06491 Version: I Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/27/2012 11:54 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 141 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06491 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/27/2012 09:30 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 142 of 291 I Etegy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06497 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:02 Originator Phone: 4028253620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 17:23 Condition

==

Description:==

ADHESIVE CLIPS NOT ATTACHED Condition:

Adhesive clips/ glue shoes found inside LRP-H-PNL were no longer attached to metal enclosure.

Glue shoes/clips appear to be supporting ethernet cables. Without the clips the cables could interact with other components inside the panel. There is what appears to be a yellow ethernet hub attached to the roof of the panel by adhesive tape. The hub is sagging and is only supported by adhesive clips and connections to the hub by the ethernet cords. The weight of the hub is very small and the impact to other components inside the panel will not damage them.Requirement not met: Adhesive clips restraining cables inside the panel are not attached, and hub should not be sagging.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to walkdown LRP-H-PNL.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Operators in the control room.Suggested Action

Description:

Reattach with more permanent fixtures.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 143 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06497 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 17:23 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:17 Summary

Description:

ADHESIVE CLIPS NOT ATTACHED Condition:

Adhesive clips/ glue shoes found inside LRP-H-PNL were no longer attached to metal enclosure.

Glue shoes/clips appear to be supporting ethernet cables. Without the clips the cables could interact with other components inside the panel. There is what appears to be a yellow ethernet hub attached to the roof of the panel by adhesive tape. The hub is sagging and is only supported by adhesive clips and connections to the hub by the ethernet cords. The weight of the hub is very small and the impact to other components inside the panel will not damage them.Requirement not met: Adhesive clips restraining cables inside the panel are not attached, and hub should not be sagging.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to walkdown LRP-H-PNL.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12.E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 144 of 291

ýEntergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06497 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: NOT REQUIRED Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/27/2012 11:28 09/27/2012 20:17 Operability

==

Description:==

Per SAP, PC-FQ-513 Nitrogen Makeup Supply Integrator is classified as Non-Essential and is the only component in danger of being struck should the remaining adhesive clips detach. The cabling is rigidly attached to a conduit -lft from the hub which effectively limits the swing path of the hub should it detach. Per discussions with engineering the hub and cabling is all coated in a non-conductive plastic and rubber material so in the event that they detached there low weight and non-conductive construction posses no threat to the surrounding equipment.

Per 0.5OPS this condition screens as operability Not Required.Per 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

Approval Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 145 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06497 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 146 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06497 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: NON-SAFETY EQUII Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/28/2012 07:44 Reportability

==

Description:==

Not an SSC that affects safety function, and does not meet criteria for reportability.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 147 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06498 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:23 Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 17:37 Condition

==

Description:==

CONTROL ROOM ELECTRICAL BOX BRACING Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns it was noticed that an electrical box (possibly a Computer CPU) is not strapped or fastened down. The box is directly behind a monitor located in Control Room Panel 9-4 and located on the same bracket support as the monitor.Peak vertical acceleration for the control room El. 932' is 0.31 g's (bracket support is considered rigid). Since the vertical acceleration is less than 1.0, no uplift shall occur and since the bracket support has vertical sheet steel sides, the electrical box cannot fall and damage any safety related components.

Therefore this is not a seismic interaction concern.A photo of this configuration can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Bracing of the box to discourage dynamic motion during a seismic event.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54() Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Discussed with Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Assign DED Civil to evaluate the necessity of bracing the box.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS- 2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 148 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06498 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 17:37 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/2/2012 10:25 Summary

Description:

CONTROL ROOM ELECTRICAL BOX BRACING Condition:

During 50.54(o Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns it was noticed that an electrical box (possibly a Computer CPU) is not strapped or fastened down. The box is directly behind a monitor located in Control Room Panel 9-4 and located on the same bracket support as the monitor.Peak vertical acceleration for the control room El. 932' is 0.31 g's (bracket support is considered rigid). Since the vertical acceleration is less than 1.0, no uplift shall occur and since the bracket support has vertical sheet steel sides, the electrical box cannot fall and damage any safety related components.

Therefore this is not a seismic interaction concern.A photo of this configuration can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Bracing of the box to discourage dynamic motion during a seismic event.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 149 of 291 OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06498 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: NOT REQUIRED Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Murphy,Brian P Operability

==

Description:==

09/27/2012 03:39 09/27/2012 04:19 As stated in the CR no seismic issues exist with this equipmemt configuration.

The computer equipment is associated with the annunciator system.The equipment is not safety related and performs no active or passive safety function that would either prevent or mitigate any analyzed accident or transient.

The equipment performs no support function that would cause safety related or important to safety equipment to become inoperable or incapable of performing the intended safety or support function.

Per 0.5OPS, this condition screens out as Operability Determination:

NOT REQUIRED.

Per Procedure 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

A Functionality assessment is also NOT REQUIRED as this equipment provides no support function to any TS SSC?s or SSC?s required by the TRM, or ODAM or any function specified in 0.5OPS.Approval Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 150 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06498 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/01/2012 10:32 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 151 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06498 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: NON-SAFETY EQUIt Performed By: Madsen,David N 09/27/2012 09:34 Reportability

==

Description:==

Not an SSC that affects safety function, and does not meet criteria for reportability.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 152 of 291 I Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06500 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:25 Originator Phone: 4028253620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 17:53 Condition

==

Description:==

MISSING CLIP ON CONDUIT RACEWAY Condition:

When performing the area walkdown for P-4 in the control room, a clip was found missing from the support below the conduit raceway on Div I C235A. The conduit raceway is in the Control Room on the backside of Panel 9-4 next to bay 6. No immediate concern was identified due to the length of the raceway. Due to the configuration of the adjacent supports, the lateral movement of the raceway is not possible without the failure of the adjacent supports.

No concerns were found in the walkdown in regards to the adjacent supports.

No pictures were acquired of the missing clip.Requirement not met: Strut was not long enough to accomodate raceway fastener.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted operations personnel within the control room and reviewed the area in question.Suggested Action

Description:

Repair the conduit raceway with applicable B-Line components.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code P501 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 153 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06500 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 17:53 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:18 Summary

Description:

MISSING CLIP ON CONDUIT RACEWAY Condition:

When performing the area walkdown for P-4 in the control room, a clip was found missing from the support below the conduit raceway on Div I C235A. The conduit raceway is in the Control Room on the backside of Panel 9-4 next to bay 6. No immediate concern was identified due to the length of the raceway. Due to the configuration of the adjacent supports, the lateral movement of the raceway is not possible without the failure of the adjacent supports.

No concerns were found in the walkdown in regards to the adjacent supports.

No pictures were acquired of the missing clip.Requirement not met: Strut was not long enough to accomodate raceway fastener.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 154 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06500 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/27/2012 23:52 Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 00:36 Operability

==

Description:==

No specific equipment is identified therefore specific LCOs and Safety Functions cannot be listed.Evaluation of the condition is attached.

All associated equipment remains operable.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Evaluation CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 155 of 291 Hntergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06500 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 156 of 291 Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06500 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/28/2012 07:45 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 157 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06501 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028253620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:44 Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 17:55 Condition

==

Description:==

LIGHTS IN FIXTURES NOT RESTRAINED Condition:

Small florescent light fixtures inside bays of panels in the control room do not have cages around them to keep the light bulb from falling out. Due to the low mass of the small light bulb, it does not have the capacity to damage components inside if it were to fall out. Photos are under CR folder in: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)Requirement not met: Light bulbs should be restrained with cages to ensure they do not fall out of housings.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown team was performing walkdowns of SSEL components located inside the control room.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE on duty Suggested Action

Description:

Lights should have restraints to ensure they do not fall out of housings.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 158 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06501 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 17:55 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:18 Summary

Description:

LIGHTS IN FIXTURES NOT RESTRAINED Condition:

Small florescent light fixtures inside bays of panels in the control room do not have cages around them to keep the light bulb from falling out. Due to the low mass of the small light bulb, it does not have the capacity to damage components inside if it were to fall out. Photos are under CR folder in: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)Requirement not met: Light bulbs should be restrained with cages to ensure they do not fall out of housings.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown team was performing walkdowns of SSEL components located inside the control room.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 159 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06501 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Long,Jerry J Operability

==

Description:==

09/27/2012 03:59 09/27/2012 20:12 The current installation is part of original construction.

The panels were supplied that way from GE (REF GE dwg 791E257, sh. 2 R10 as an example).This issue is administrative in nature and documented for tracking purposes.

The condition described does not affect the operability of any equipment required by the TS/TRM, does not affect risk significant SSCs modeled in Maintenance Rule, and does not affect required support functions per the UFSAR or other LBDs. The condition described in the CR does not meet the criteria specified by G.O.P. 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 for an event or condition immediately reportable to the NRC.Approval Comments: No degraded or non-conforming condition.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 160 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06501 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E08 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 161 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06501 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: UNANALYZED CON Performed By: Madsen,David N 09/28/2012 07:47 Reportability

==

Description:==

The nuclear power plant was not in an un-analyzed condition that significantly degraded plant safety.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 162 of 291 Entergy I CONDITION REPORT ICR-CNS-2012-06502 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:40 Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 17:55 Condition

==

Description:==

INCONSISTENT FASTENER CONFIGURATION Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown teams were conducting Area Walk-bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that a splice plate on a cable tray only has seven fasteners (Bolts) instead of eight (which is typical for the other splice plates on the same cable tray. This cable tray is located in the Control Room, no label was located on the tray. The cable tray does not appear to have an additional hole for an 8th bolt.Splice plate integrity is maintained since there are a minimum of three bolts per splice side. The couple force due to the moment demand can be resisted by the bolt's shear capacity.A photo of the cable tray splice plate can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: There is an inconsistent fastener configuration throughout the cable tray leading to the possibility of a configuration control issue.Method of Discovery:

Consult DED Civil to confirm that the configuration is as designed and is present in current plant documentation.

Immediate Action

Description:

Discussed with Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Consult DED Civil to determine if the configuration control documents match the current configuration.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C09 PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 163 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06502 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 17:55 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/2/2012 10:26 Summary

Description:

INCONSISTENT FASTENER CONFIGURATION Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the walkdown teams were conducting Area Walk-bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that a splice plate on a cable tray only has seven fasteners (Bolts) instead of eight (which is typical for the other splice plates on the same cable tray. This cable tray is located in the Control Room, no label was located on the tray. The cable tray does not appear to have an additional hole for an 8th bolt.Splice plate integrity is maintained since there are a minimum of three bolts per splice side. The couple force due to the moment demand can be resisted by the bolt's shear capacity.A photo of the cable tray splice plate can be found in T:Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: There is an inconsistent fastener configuration throughout the cable tray leading to the possibility of a configuration control issue.Method of Discovery:

Consult DED Civil to confirm that the configuration is as designed and is present in current plant documentation.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 164 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06502 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Murphy,Brian P Operability

==

Description:==

No specific LCOs or safety functions can be identified.

09/27/2012 00:11 09/27/2012 01:22 There is no indication that this is a degraded or non-conforming condition.

The 7 bolt configuration is consistent in that the joining plates on both sides are connected with 7 bolts. The eighth bolt could not have been installed due to the configuration of the structural ribbing of the cable tray. A hole drilled in that spot would have damaged the joining rib of the cable tray. As stated in the CR, the 3 bolts on the one side of the joining plate is sufficient to maintain structural and seismic integrity.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 165 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06502 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/01/2012 10:32 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 166 of 291 Hn teiW I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06502 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/27/2012 09:36 Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 167 of 291 I Entergy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06505 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/26/2012 17:54 Originator Phone: 4028253620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/26/2012 18:07 Condition

==

Description:==

MISSING HOLD DOWN SCREWS Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.During the walk-by it was observed that the Kaman Effluent Radiation Monitors, located in the Control Room, have various cover plates that are missing a cover plate hold down screw (3 instead of 4). Due to the small mass of the cover plates, three screws will hold it in place.Requirement not met: Three of four hold screws in place.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Notified the operators within the control room and walked them down.Suggested Action

Description:

Attempt to replace screws if not stripped.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code 1 P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 168 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06505 Initiated Date: 9/26/2012 18:07 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 10/1/2012 12:03 Summary

Description:

MISSING HOLD DOWN SCREWS Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.During the walk-by it was observed that the Kaman Effluent Radiation Monitors, located in the Control Room, have various cover plates that are missing a cover plate hold down screw (3 instead of 4). Due to the small mass of the cover plates, three screws will hold it in place.Requirement not met: Three of four hold screws in place.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 169 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06505 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: EQUIPMENT FUNCTIONAL Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/27/2012 03:32 Approved By: Murphy,Brian P 09/27/2012 04:20 Operability

==

Description:==

The equipment is functional as it does continue to operate as required.

These bezels serve no seismic function and cannot damage safety related equipment if they were to come off. The loss of the bezel would not affect the Kaman's ability to function.This Bezel does not support any TS required or CLB functions.

No Compensatory Measures were required and the equipment remains in service.There is no immediate reportability associated with this condition per procedure 2.0.5 or NUREG 1022.Approval Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 170 of 291 Entegy I A S S I G N M E N T S I CRCNS201206505 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Deatz,Ronnie C Assignment

==

Description:==

09/27/2012 11:54 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 171 of 291 I Eý,t,,gy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06505 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

09/27/2012 09:38 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 172 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06573 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 4028252527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 13:35 Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 14:20 Condition

==

Description:==

CLIP NOT ATTACHED TO CABLE Condition:

A grounding wire that runs into and out of Aux Relay Room in Control Building 903 has one clip that has come off that restrains it to the wall. This cable is located near column line G.7 on the north wall of the room. The clip was near where the wire entered the room from the ceiling. There are other clips engaged nearby that properly secure it to the wall. Besides the one clip, the cable appears properly secured to the wall and there is not a concern with it detaching.

The photo is located in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs) under the CR number.Requirement not met: Ground wire should be fully attached to the wall with all available clips.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Seismic walkdowns the Seismic Engineers conducted an area walk-by of the Control Room 903 Aux Relay Room.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE in the Control Room Suggested Action

Description:

Reattach the clip to the cable.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 173 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06573 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 14:20 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:19 Summary

Description:

CLIP NOT ATTACHED TO CABLE Condition:

A grounding wire that runs into and out of Aux Relay Room in Control Building 903 has one clip that has come off that restrains it to the wall. This cable is located near column line G.7 on the north wall of the room. The clip was near where the wire entered the room from the ceiling. There are other clips engaged nearby that properly secure it to the wall. Besides the one clip, the cable appears properly secured to the wall and there is not a concern with it detaching.

The photo is located in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs) under the CR number.Requirement not met: Ground wire should be fully attached to the wall with all available clips.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(0 Seismic walkdowns the Seismic Engineers conducted an area walk-by of the Control Room 903 Aux Relay Room.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 174 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06573 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/27/2012 23:44 09/28/2012 00:34 Operability

==

Description:==

No specific equipment is identified as such, there are no specific LCOs to list and no specific safety functions to describe.however since this is described as a ground cable, it is fair to assume that this supports the AC Distribution system.Therefore LCO 3.8.1 potentially applies.The AC and DC electrical power distribution systems are designed t o provide sufficient capacity, capability, redundancy, and reliability to ensure the availability of necessary power t o ESF systems so that the fuel , Reactor Coolant System, and containment design limits are not exceeded.

These limits are discussed in more detail in the Bases for Section 3.2 , Power Distribution Limits; Section 3.5, Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC)System; and Section 3.6 Containment Systems.The OPERABILITY of the AC and DC electrical power distribution subsystems is consistent with the initial assumptions of the accident analyses and is based upon meeting the design basis of the unit. This includes maintaining distribution systems OPERABLE during accident conditions in the event of: a. An assumed loss of all offsite power or all onsite AC electrical power; and b. A postulated worst case single failure.The cable is adequately restrained even with the one clip not being attached.

The remaining clips are sufficient to provide adequate restraint to the cable. All associated equipment remains operable.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 175 of 291 Entergy I A S S I GN M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06573 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 176 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06573 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/28/2012 10:36 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 177 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06579 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 14:24 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 15:07 Condition

==

Description:==

ANCHORAGE DRAWING INCONSISTENT Condition:

The voltage regulator cabinet DG1 EXCIT REG PNL as-built configuration for connection to embedded equipment base differs plant drawings.

Drawing 4124 and Burns and Roe calculation state that the base channel (seen in drawing 14DSB-0209) is welded with fillet welds to the embedded steel. The base is welded to the embedded steel on the back and underneath the cabinet, but the front of the cabinet has plates welded to the front that are attached to the concrete pedestal with approximately 1 inch anchors. The current configuration is consistent with the seismic anchorage calculations, but differs from drawing 4124. Refer to T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)under the CR number for photos.Requirement not met: Configuration Control should match as-built conditions.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(o Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walkdown team was required to do a walkdown of the Diesel Generator 1 Voltage Regulator Cabinet.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE in the control room.Suggested Action

Description:

Action to DED to verify and correct plant drawings.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS DRAWING DEFICIENCY PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 KEYWORDS CALC REPORT WEIGHT 1 CONSEQUENCES C02 DEPT CAUSING DED PROGRAM FUNCTION P316 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 178 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06579 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 15:07 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

ANCHORAGE DRAWING INCONSISTENT Condition:

The voltage regulator cabinet DG1 EXCIT REG PNL as-built configuration for connection to embedded equipment base differs plant drawings.

Drawing 4124 and Burns and Roe calculation state that the base channel (seen in drawing 14DSB-0209) is welded with fillet welds to the embedded steel. The base is welded to the embedded steel on the back and underneath the cabinet, but the front of the cabinet has plates welded to the front that are attached to the concrete pedestal with approximately 1 inch anchors. The current configuration is consistent with the seismic anchorage calculations, but differs from drawing 4124. Refer to T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)under the CR number for photos.Requirement not met: Configuration Control should match as-built conditions.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walkdown team was required to do a walkdown of the Diesel Generator 1 Voltage Regulator Cabinet.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.10/09/12 -Reopened for a new Operability Review.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 179 of 291 I Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06579 I OperabilityVersion:

2 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle 10/10/2012 19:55 Approved By: Dedic,James R 10/10/2012 21:16 Operability

==

Description:==

DG-VRG-DG1 TS 3.3.3.2, 3.8.1 and 3.8.2 apply. DG provides electrical power if off site power is lost. DG must start automatically, accelerate to rated speed and voltage, and connect to its respective 4.16 kV critical bus on detection of undervoltage.

The sequence must be accomplished within 14 seconds. The DG must be capable of accepting required loads within the assumed loading sequence intervals, and provide uninterrupted power. Proper sequencing of loads, including load shedding, is a required function for DG Operability.

DG2 shall be used as the power source for AC powered alternate shutdown components in the special event that the Control Room control capability is damaged by fire and the Alternate Shutdown controls are to be utilized.Voltage regulator changes the output voltage when the diesel generator is operating independently or changes the VAR load if the diesel generator is operating in parallel with off-site power.This is a large cabinet, and the concern of this CR is the seismic mounting configuration.

The original design of the cabinet mounting was welded to the embedements in the concrete.

The as built configuration has the front mounting utilizing two welded on blocks with an anchor bolt in each one. Per the Screening Evaluation Worksheet, which evaluated this configuration for seismic loading, the factor of safety for mounting this equipment is > 2.3. See SEWS worksheet attached.

This estimate is based on the GIP 3 Experience Based Method as described in the USAR Section XII-2.3.5.2.4.

See Attached USAR excerpt.Based on adequate and satisfactory evaluation of the as found condition per the SEWS worksheet, DG 1 and the DG 1 Voltage Regulator cabinet mounting satisfy seismic requirements, and the DG will start and load as required by its design requirements following a seismic event. DG 1 is Operable.Ref drawings 4123, 4124 Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Screening Evaluation Worksheet 2012-06579 USAR Excerpt Original B&R Calculation Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 180 of 291

ýEntergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06579 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/27/2012 22:45 Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 00:31 Operability

==

Description:==

This is a drawing issue, not an equipment issue.This issue is administrative in nature and documented for tracking purposes.

The condition described does not affect the operability of any equipment required by the TS/TRM, does not affect risk significant SSCs modeled in Maintenance Rule, and does not affect required support functions per the UFSAR or other LBDs. The condition described in the CR does not meet the criteria specified by G.O.P. 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 for an event or condition immediately reportable to the NRC.Approval Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 181 of 291

ýEn terw ASSIGNMENTS CR-CNS-2012-06579 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 182 of 291

ýEntergy IREPORTABILITY ICR-CNS-2012-06579 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: DOCUMENTATION Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/28/2012 10:40 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is a question or issue of proper documentation and does not introduce or identify an equipment, radiological nor security problem. Should the question's answer reveal a CNS condition, a new CR will be written.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 183 of 291 I Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06582 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 15:09 Originator Phone: 4028252527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 15:27 Condition

==

Description:==

NUTS ON COMPONENTS INCONSISTENT Condition:

The voltage regulator cabinet DG1 EXCIT REG PNL was found to have internal components attached with nuts and bolts that differ from adjacent nuts restraining the same component.

In the back of the DGI Voltage Regulator Cabinet there are 3 large components that look like transformers that are mounted to the bottom of the cabinet. One of the nuts on the bolts is different from the others having a smaller length. The internal components are rigidly connected with all the nuts fully engaged, the only difference being the nut on the bolt. It is unclear why this difference exists, this CR is being written to document this condition.

Refer to T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)under the CR folder number for photos.Requirement not met: nuts should match other nuts if they were replaced like for like within the cabinet Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walkdown team was required to do a walkdown of the Diesel Generator 1 Voltage Regulator Cabinet.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE in the control room.Suggested Action

Description:

Action to DED to verify configuration.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code P501 I Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 184 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06582 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 15:27 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:20 Summary

Description:

NUTS ON COMPONENTS INCONSISTENT Condition:

The voltage regulator cabinet DG1 EXCIT REG PNL was found to have internal components attached with nuts and bolts that differ from adjacent nuts restraining the same component.

In the back of the DG1 Voltage Regulator Cabinet there are 3 large components that look like transformers that are mounted to the bottom of the cabinet. One of the nuts on the bolts is different from the others having a smaller length. The internal components are rigidly connected with all the nuts fully engaged, the only difference being the nut on the bolt. It is unclear why this difference exists, this CR is being written to document this condition.

Refer to T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)under the CR folder number for photos.Requirement not met: nuts should match other nuts if they were replaced like for like within the cabinet Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walkdown team was required to do a walkdown of the Diesel Generator 1 Voltage Regulator Cabinet.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 185 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06582 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/27/2012 22:36 Approved By: Long,JerryJ 09/28/2012 00:30 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.1, 3.8.2 The onsite standby power source for 4.16 kV critical buses IF and IG consists of two DGs. DG-1 and DG-2 are dedicated to critical buses IF and 1G, respectively.

A DG starts automatically on a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) signal (i.e., low reactor water level signal or high drywell pressure signal) or on a critical bus degraded voltage or undervoltage signal.After the DG has started, it automatically ties to its respective bus after offsite power is tripped as a consequence of critical bus undervoltage or degraded voltage, independent of or coincident with a LOCA signal. The DGs also start and operate in the standby mode without tying to the critical bus on a LOCA signal alone. Following the trip of offsite power, all loads are shed from the critical bus. When the DG is tied to the critical bus, loads are then sequentially connected to its respective critical bus. The sequencing logic controls the permissive and starting signals to motor breakers to prevent overloading the DG.During 50.54(f) seismic walkdowns, two engineers were conducting a walkdown of the DG Voltage Regulator Cabinet.During the inspection of the cabinet internals, a question was raised regarding the presence of a hex head nut differs from the other nuts in the configuration.

Under further investigation it appears that the nut has different exterior dimensions.

This leads to the assumption that the other nuts in the configuration are heavy hex while the nut in question is a standard hex.In this scenario a heavy hex versus a standard hex will only change the tensile strength of the configuration.

The nuts do not resist shear in any way because the horizontal force bears only on the bolt. The seismic acceleration is conservatively approximated at 0. 1g. This value is less than the weight of the configuration, resulting in no vertical movement of the component, which means tension in the bolts, due to the component, will not occur.?DG operability is not challenged by this condition.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 186 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06582 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 187 of 291 REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06582 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/28/2012 10:42 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 188 of 291 Entegy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06611 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 2527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 14:26 Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 19:33 Condition

==

Description:==

General Housekeeping mess Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown engineers found several tools on top of a toolbox. The toolbox was located on a catwalk, at elevation 903', in the southeast area of the reactor building.

The tools had no restraints to prevent them from falling off the toolbox and onto other equipment.

A hose was found draped over the catwalk, presenting a potential tripping hazard, and cable coils in the overhead north of the catwalk had slid halfway out of their designated area and could potentially fall out completely.

In addition, near the catwalk, an extension cord was found draped over a copper pipe, which could present a potential shock hazard and a rope was found tied to an instrument airline.Requirement not met: General housekeeping practices were not being followed.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during an area walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV63 1.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE and initiated a CR.Suggested Action

Description:

Store the tools within a toolbox. Reroute the extension cord so that it does not come in contact with any pipes. Store the hose in its proper location.

Remove the rope from the instrument airline and secure the cable coils so that they will not come loose.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code PROGRAM FUNCTION P412 DEPT CAUSING MNT REPORT WEIGHT I PRECURSOR ERROR P6 Attachments:

Condition Description tools extension chord cables_1 cables_2 rope hose Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 189 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06611 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 19:33 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/24/2012 14:08 Summary

Description:

General Housekeeping mess Condition:

During 50.54(f Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown engineers found several tools on top of a toolbox. The toolbox was located on a catwalk, at elevation 903', in the southeast area of the reactor building.

The tools had no restraints to prevent them from falling off the toolbox and onto other equipment.

A hose was found draped over the catwalk, presenting a potential tripping hazard, and cable coils in the overhead north of the catwalk had slid halfway out of their designated area and could potentially fall out completely.

In addition, near the catwalk, an extension cord was found draped over a copper pipe, which could present a potential shock hazard and a rope was found tied to an instrument airline.Requirement not met: General housekeeping practices were not being followed.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during an area walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV63 1.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed because of actions taken as documented were considered adequate for this condition.

This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions.If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 190 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06611 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/27/2012 20:04 09/28/2012 05:15 Operability

==

Description:==

This issue is administrative in nature and documented for tracking purposes.

The condition described does not affect the operability of any equipment required by the TS/TRM, does not affect risk significant SSCs modeled in Maintenance Rule, and does not affect required support functions per the UFSAR or other LBDs. The condition described in the CR does not meet the criteria specified by G.O.P. 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 for an event or condition immediately reportable to the NRC.Approval Comments: All items on this CR have been corrected.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 191 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06611 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: CBOAT Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 192 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06611 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: HOUSEKEEPING Performed By : Madsen,David N 09/28/2012 10:52 Reportability

==

Description:==

No equipment operability, radiological, security nor industrial safety issues that meet criteria for reporting.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 193 of 291 Entgy I CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06612 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 2527 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 20:44 Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 20:54 Condition

==

Description:==

DG-1 General Housekeeping issues Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown engineers found a man hole cover (approximately 1-1/2" thick steel plate) leaning against other objects (see photo) in the Diesel generator 1 storage tank A manhole. The visual inspection by the walkdown engineers indicated that the cover was the original cover for the diesel storage tank. It was unclear from the as found condition if the manhole cover was supposed to be stored in the man hole or if it was supposed to be stored at a separate location.In addition, the walkdown engineers also noticed some tape wrapped around a hose in the manhole. The hose is located near the ladder in the manhole.Requirement not met: General housekeeping practices were not being followed.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during an area walk-by of Diesel oil transfer pump A.Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE and initiated a CR.Suggested Action

Description:

Identify the proper location for the man hole cover and relocate the plate to that location or to storage. Remove the tape from the hose.TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code PROGRAM FUNCTION P412 CONSEQUENCES C09 REPORT WEIGHT 1 Attachments:

Condition Description cover_1 Cover_2 tape & hose Engineering Evaluation 12-EI1 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 194 of 291 EnteIgy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-06612 CA Number: I Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site I CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Mnt Mech Staff CNS-Name I Dewhirst,Linda O'Connor,James Patric Bantz,Dennis R Originated By: HathawayTricia D 10/3/2012 16:45:48 Performed By: O'Connor,James Patrick 10/22/2012 05:11:34 Subperformed By: Helms,David P 10/20/2012 22:31:12 Approved By: Closed By: O'Connor,James Patrick 10/22/2012 05:11:34 Current Due Date: 11/01/2012 CA Type: ENHANCE Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Resolve Identified Condition.

CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Tvye Code CROSS REF PRIORITY Response: cocnur jpo Subresponse:

Action: Resolve Identified Condition.

Initial Due Date: CA Priority: 11/01/2012 Description LO-WTCNS-2012-00018-48 4 Response:

As a result of walkdown of the DG bunker for CR-CNS-2012-06612 tape was found and a manhole cover were identified.

Per discussion with Mechanical MNT this needs to be addressed post RE27. Therefore, a WT (2012-00018-48) was created.Closure Comments: Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 195 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06612 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 20:54 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

E Closed by: Summary

Description:

DG-1 General Housekeeping issues Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Walkdown engineers found a man hole cover (approximately 1-1/2" thick steel plate) leaning against other objects (see photo) in the Diesel generator 1 storage tank A manhole. The visual inspection by the walkdown engineers indicated that the cover was the original cover for the diesel storage tank. It was unclear from the as found condition if the manhole cover was supposed to be stored in the man hole or if it was supposed to be stored at a separate location.In addition, the walkdown engineers also noticed some tape wrapped around a hose in the manhole. The hose is located near the ladder in the manhole.Requirement not met: General housekeeping practices were not being followed.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during an area walk-by of Diesel oil transfer pump A.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 196 of 291 I Hn tergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06612 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/27/2012 21:49 09/28/2012 00:26 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.8.1, 3.8.2, and 3.8.3 potentially apply.The onsite standby power source for 4.16 kV critical buses IF and 1 G consists of two DGs. DG- 1 and DG-2 are dedicated to critical buses 1F and 1G, respectively.

A DG starts automatically on a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) signal (i.e., low reactor water level signal or high drywell pressure signal) or on a critical bus degraded voltage or undervoltage signal.After the DG has started, it automatically ties to its respective bus after offsite power is tripped as a consequence of critical bus undervoltage or degraded voltage, independent of or coincident with a LOCA signal. The DGs also start and operate in the standby mode without tying to the critical bus on a LOCA signal alone. Following the trip of offsite power, all loads are shed from the critical bus. When the DG is tied to the critical bus, loads are then sequentially connected to its respective critical bus. The sequencing logic controls the permissive and starting signals to motor breakers to prevent overloading the DG.The presence of this cover does not present a challenge to DG-1 operability.

Assuming a seismic acceleration

0. Ig, there will be no vertical movement of the plate as the weight of the plate will be greater than the vertical force imposed on it. The plate cannot impact anything in the manhole with enough force to cause any damage aashes the only thing it could hit would be the large flanged penetration which is part of the tank itself. The weight of the tank and attached flange is much greater than the cover. The presence of this cover does not challenge DG- 1 operability.

The tape is a housekeeping issue only.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-ElS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 197 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06612 Version: 1 Significance Code: E Classification Code: DD Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 198 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06612 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

09/28/2012 10:52 Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 199 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06613 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 20:54 Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 21:06 Condition

==

Description:==

PT634A NOT PROPERLY MOUNTED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys in the DO storage tank A manhole. During the area walk-by, it was observed that PT 634A is not fully attached to b-line supports.

The top of PT634A has tabs attached to a b-line strut mounted to the wall. Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\The PT634A is assumed to be an l8in wide x 10in long x 15in deep electrical box conservatively assumed to weigh 50 lbs including the attached cables. The top connections of the box are connected to a 1-5/8in unistrut by a 1/4in diameter, 20 threads per inch, bolts. The smallest available connection bolts for b-line are listed to have an allowable pullout of 600 lbs per nut and a resistance to slip of 300 lbs. The worst seismic loading at the elevation of the reactor building is 1.5 g's.With an estimated weight of 50 lbs and conservatively accounting for multimodal effects by increasing the loading by 1.5, this gives a seismic loading of 113 lbs. The bolted connection to the unistrut can resist 300 lbs per bolt for shear slipping and 600 lbs per bolt for tensile pullout of the unistrut.

The 113 lbs seismic loading is far below the conservative allowables.

We have three bolts connecting the box, the actual acceleration value is realistically under lg and the actual weight is less than 50 lbs.Requirement not met: Having only the three tabs attached is not in accordance with standard seismic mounting for this box.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (0) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE, consulted Design Civil Suggested Action

Description:

Replace missing bolt EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code PT-634A DGDO TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 200 of 291 Enterg IADMIN CR-CNS-2012-06613 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 21:06 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 10/1/2012 12:09 Summary

Description:

PT634A NOT PROPERLY MOUNTED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys in the DO storage tank A manhole. During the area walk-by, it was observed that PT 634A is not fully attached to b-line supports.

The top of PT634A has tabs attached to a b-line strut mounted to the wall. Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\The PT634A is assumed to be an 18in wide x 10in long x 15in deep electrical box conservatively assumed to weigh 50 lbs including the attached cables. The top connections of the box are connected to a 1-5/8in unistrut by a 1/4in diameter, 20 threads per inch, bolts. The smallest available connection bolts for b-line are listed to have an allowable pullout of 600 lbs per nut and a resistance to slip of 300 lbs. The worst seismic loading at the elevation of the reactor building is 1.5 g's.With an estimated weight of 50 lbs and conservatively accounting for multimodal effects by increasing the loading by 1.5, this gives a seismic loading of 113 lbs. The bolted connection to the unistrut can resist 300 lbs per bolt for shear slipping and 600 lbs per bolt for tensile pullout of the unistrut.

The 113 lbs seismic loading is far below the conservative allowables.

We have three bolts connecting the box, the actual acceleration value is realistically under lg and the actual weight is less than 50 lbs.Requirement not met: Having only the three tabs attached is not in accordance with standard seismic mounting for this box.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 201 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06613 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Schizas,Fred A 09/28/2012 03:54 Approved By: Long,JerryJ 09/28/2012 05:01 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.1, 3.8.2, and 3.8.3 The onsite standby power source for 4.16 kV critical buses IF and 1G consists of two DGs. DG-1 and DG-2 are dedicated to critical buses IF and IG, respectively.

A DG starts automatically on a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) signal (i.e., low reactor water level signal or high drywell pressure signal) or on a critical bus degraded voltage or undervoltage signal.After the DG has started, it automatically ties to its respective bus after offsite power is tripped as a consequence of critical bus undervoltage or degraded voltage, independent of or coincident with a LOCA signal. The DGs also start and operate in the standby mode without tying to the critical bus on a LOCA signal alone. Following the trip of offsite power, all loads are shed from the critical bus. When the DG is tied to the critical bus, loads are then sequentially connected to its respective critical bus. The sequencing logic controls the permissive and starting signals to motor breakers to prevent overloading the DG.The PT634A is assumed to be an 18in wide x 10in long x 15in deep electrical box conservatively assumed to weigh 50 lbs including the attached cables. The top connections of the box are connected to a 1-5/8in unistrut by a 1/4in diameter, 20 threads per inch, bolts. The smallest available connection bolts for b-line are listed to have an allowable pullout of 600 lbs per nut and a resistance to slip of 300 lbs. The worst seismic loading at the elevation of the reactor building is 1.5 g's.With an estimated weight of 50 lbs and conservatively accounting for multimodal effects by increasing the loading by 1.5, this gives a seismic loading of 113 lbs. The bolted connection to the unistrut can resist 300 lbs per bolt for shear slipping and 600 lbs per bolt for tensile pullout of the unistrut.

The 113 lbs seismic loading is far below the conservative allowables.

We have three bolts connecting the box, the actual acceleration value is realistically under lg and the actual weight is less than 50 lbs, No operability concerns exist for this condition.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description CHECKLIST Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 202 of 291 Enteigy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06613 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

10/01/2012 10:28 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 203 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06613 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N 09/28/2012 10:53 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 204 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06615 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/27/2012 21:17 Originator Phone: 3620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/27/2012 21:23 Condition

==

Description:==

BOLTS NOT FULLY TORQUED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys.During the area walk-by, it was observed that bolts securing a manhole upon which the Diesel Oil Transfer Pump A is mounted has two loose nuts. Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos .(CRs)\Only two nuts are verified to be loose. The others are hand tight.Requirement not met: Nuts should be tight Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted STE, discussed the issue with Design Civil Suggested Action

Description:

Tighten bolts in accordance with CNS bolt torquing procedure EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name P-DOTA Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code 1 I DGDO TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 205 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06615 Initiated Date: 9/27/2012 21:23 Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

W Closed by: Anderson,Donny L 10/2/2012 14:41 Summary

Description:

BOLTS NOT FULLY TORQUED Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys.During the area walk-by, it was observed that bolts securing a manhole upon which the Diesel Oil Transfer Pump A is mounted has two loose nuts. Photos can be found in a folder with the CR number under: T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs)\Only two nuts are verified to be loose. The others are hand tight.Requirement not met: Nuts should be tight Method of Discovery:

During 50.54 (f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an area walk-by in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been classified as a CAT W and will not be addressed by the 0.5 CAP Procedures.

Correction of this condition will be scheduled and completed in accordance with the work management process. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the Work Control Manager.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 206 of 291 Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06615 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 09/28/2012 20:46 Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 21:54 Operability

==

Description:==

LCO 3.8.1, 3.8.2, and 3.8.3 The onsite standby power source for 4.16 kV critical buses IF and IG consists of two DGs. DG-1 and DG-2 are dedicated to critical buses 1F and 1 G, respectively.

A DG starts automatically on a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) signal (i.e., low reactor water level signal or high drywell pressure signal) or on a critical bus degraded voltage or undervoltage signal.After the DG has started, it automatically ties to its respective bus after offsite power is tripped as a consequence of critical bus undervoltage or degraded voltage, independent of or coincident with a LOCA signal. The DGs also start and operate in the standby mode without tying to the critical bus on a LOCA signal alone. Following the trip of offsite power, all loads are shed from the critical bus. When the DG is tied to the critical bus, loads are then sequentially connected to its respective critical bus. The sequencing logic controls the permissive and starting signals to motor breakers to prevent overloading the DG.The as found condition of the pump mounting plate was identified as two (2) of the mounting nuts were less than hand tight. All others were at least hand tight. Reviewing the supplied photograph indicates there are 18 total mounting bolts on the flange, meaning that 16 of the 18 installed bolts were in place and at least hand tight. This is sufficient to ensure the pump, motor and flange remain one unit for seismic response analysis in both the vertical and horizontal directions.

Factors important to the seismic response are number of bolts, bolt strength/diameter and sufficient restraint to ensure the various peices reman a single unit during the event. Since the condition identified does not affect the strength or diameter of the installed bolts and the flange will remain connected to the tank top this condition does not affect function of the fuel oil transfer pump or OPERABILITY of the DG.Also reviewed the validation task on SAP notification 10908483 which was generated by this CR. FIN Team mechanics noted that "several" of the nuts were less than wrench tight, and that they tightened ALL nuts per the vendor manual instructions and CNS Bolting and Torquing procedure (7.2.7.1).

The current condition matches the design condition and does not affect current OPERABILITY.

Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 207 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06615 Version: 1 Significance Code: W Classification Code: WORK ITEM Owner Site and Group: CNS Mnt Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

10/01/2012 10:28 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 208 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06615 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/02/2012 07:37 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified. (dnm 10-1-12, 10-2-12)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 209 of 291 I Entergy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06647 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 10:05 Originator Phone: 3620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 13:29 Condition

==

Description:==

IMPROPERLY MOUNTED MACHINE GUARD Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that a clip was missing from one of the legs on a machine guard (located between a motor and SW Booster Pump). These clips are intended to hold the guard in place. The other three pins are still in their proper configuration to ensure the guard remains in place.Requirement not met: Proper anchorage of the machine guard is not maintained.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Recommend installing a new pin and inspecting the other SW Booster Pumps for similar issues.EQUIPMENT:

Tap Name Tau Naime Comnonent Cade Procev Syvtem Code P-BPC 1 1 SW REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code P501 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 210 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06647 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 13:29 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: HathawayTricia D 10/4/2012 7:20 Summary

Description:

IMPROPERLY MOUNTED MACHINE GUARD Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that a clip was missing from one of the legs on a machine guard (located between a motor and SW Booster Pump). These clips are intended to hold the guard in place. The other three pins are still in their proper configuration to ensure the guard remains in place.Requirement not met: Proper anchorage of the machine guard is not maintained.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 211 of 291

[ Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06647 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 22:00 09/28/2012 22:08 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to provide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

With one of four retention clips missing on the legs on a machine guard (located between a motor and SW Booster Pump)the other three pins are still in their proper configuration to ensure the guard remains in place.RHRSW System remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 212 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N S CR-CNS-2012-06647 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 213 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06647 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/01/2012 07:51 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 214 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06648 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 13:34 Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 13:45 Condition

==

Description:==

SW PIPE SUPPORT BASE PLATE CORROSION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that surface corrosion is present on several floor mounted pipe support base plates in the area. The SWEs determined that the supports are structurally adequate with the anchor bolts still fully engaged. The current configuration, with surface corrosion, is adequate to maintain its configuration during a seismic event per consultation with the SWEs.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Corrosion/Erosion Protection requirements not met.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Inspect all floor mounted pipe supports in the area. For any supports in question, remove paint and rust, recoat to prevent further corrosion.

If, after the paint is removed, the base plates appear to have significant material loss due to the corrosion contact DED Civil for further action.EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code SW REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 REPORT WEIGHT 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 215 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06648 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 13:45 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:21 Summary

Description:

SW PIPE SUPPORT BASE PLATE CORROSION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that surface corrosion is present on several floor mounted pipe support base plates in the area. The SWEs determined that the supports are structurally adequate with the anchor bolts still fully engaged. The current configuration, with surface corrosion, is adequate to maintain its configuration during a seismic event per consultation with the SWEs.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Corrosion/Erosion Protection requirements not met.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this' condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 216 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06648 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 22:16 09/29/2012 00:31 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to provide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

Based on inspection the supports are structurally adequate with the anchor bolts still fully engaged. The current configuration, with surface corrosion, is adequate to maintain the design configuration during a seismic event.RHRSW system remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 217 of 291

ýFntergy I ASSIGNMENTS I CR-CNS-2012-06648 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 218 of 291 Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06648 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/01/2012 15:02 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 219 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06650 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 13:48 Originator Phone: 3620 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 14:07 Condition

==

Description:==

SW PIPE SUPPORT GROUT DEGRADATION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that the non-structural grout surrounding several floor mounted pipe supports is missing or degraded.

The grout in question is surrounding the base plate and does not appear to serve a structural purpose. The grout directly beneath the base plates appears to be intact.The SWEs consulted and determined that there is no structural concern with the pipe supports.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Adequate grout configuration surrounding the supports is not maintained.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Inspect the floor mounted pipe supports with grout below the base plate in the area and replace the degraded grout surrounding the floor mounted pipe supports.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-06130 GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code P501 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 220 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06650 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 14:07 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:21 Summary

Description:

SW PIPE SUPPORT GROUT DEGRADATION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that the non-structural grout surrounding several floor mounted pipe supports is missing or degraded.

The grout in question is surrounding the base plate and does not appear to serve a structural purpose. The grout directly beneath the base plates appears to be intact.The SWEs consulted and determined that there is no structural concern with the pipe supports.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Adequate grout configuration surrounding the supports is not maintained.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 221 of 291

[ Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06650 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 22:29 09/29/2012 00:35 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to proyide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

The grout is installed to fill the gap between concrete and pipe support. Grout is normally packed under the base to take up the uneven gap between the concrete and pipe support. The grout does not serve a structural purpose. As long as the grout remains present under the mounting pad it remains acceptable.

RHRSW remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 222 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS.2012-06650 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 223 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06650 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

10/01/2012 15:03 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 224 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06651 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 14:09 Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 14:25 Condition

==

Description:==

CRACKS PRESENT ON CONTROL BUILDING 882 Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that cracks in the concrete slab are present in two locations.

One crack exists starting at the North wall and traveling to the comer of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

By inspection, the SWEs determined that the crack does not appear to be in line with the skid anchor bolt. The pedestal shows no cracking.

There does not appear to be any separation in the crack. The other crack extends from the comer of a seismic pipe support to the comer of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

This crack appears to be in line with the anchor bolt associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support. The crack does not appear to be in line with the Booster Pump skid anchor bolt. No visible cracking is present on the skid pedestal.

There appears to be no separation in this crack.The anchor bolts associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support in question are not expected to act in tension, but rather shear. By inspection of the support it is designed to restrict movement in only two directions (both being parallel to the floor). Both of these directions will have a shear force. The crack will only affect the pullout strength (tension) of the anchors and will not directly affect the shear strength of the anchors.The cracks do not appear to be in line with the anchor bolts located on either Booster Pump Skid. Hypothetically speaking, if the cracks were to meet the anchor bolts of the skids it would affect the pull out strength of each affected anchor bolt.However, the anchor bolts are only resisting shear due to the low acceleration value for this elevation and the large mass of the equipment on the skid. Vertical movement is unlikely to occur.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Concrete cracking should not pass near or through anchorage.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Control Room STE and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

No further action is necessary.

This condition report is intended for trending purposes.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Revision 0 Attachment E Trend Type Trend Code Pag e 2 KEYWORDSPage 225 of 291 I Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06651-TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 226 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06651 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 14:25 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:26 Summary

Description:

CRACKS PRESENT ON CONTROL BUILDING 882 Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-by resulted in the observation that cracks in the concrete slab are present in two locations.

One crack exists starting at the North wall and traveling to the corner of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

By inspection, the SWEs determined that the crack does not appear to be in line with the skid anchor bolt. The pedestal shows no cracking.

There does not appear to be any separation in the crack. The other crack extends from the corner of a seismic pipe support to the corner of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

This crack appears to be in line with the anchor bolt associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support. The crack does not appear to be in line with the Booster Pump skid anchor bolt. No visible cracking is present on the skid pedestal.

There appears to be no separation in this crack.The anchor bolts associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support in question are not expected to act in tension, but rather shear. By inspection of the support it is designed to restrict movement in only two directions (both being parallel to the floor). Both of these directions will have a shear force. The crack will only affect the pullout strength (tension) of the anchors and will not directly affect the shear strength of the anchors.The cracks do not appear to be in line with the anchor bolts located on either Booster Pump Skid. Hypothetically speaking, if the cracks were to meet the anchor bolts of the skids it would affect the pull out strength of each affected anchor bolt.However, the anchor bolts are only resisting shear due to the low acceleration value for this elevation and the large mass of the equipment on the skid. Vertical movement is unlikely to occur.Photos can be found in TAPlant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Concrete cracking should not pass near or through anchorage.

Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 227 of 291 Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06651 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 09/28/2012 22:45 Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/29/2012 00:36 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to provide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

One crack exists starting at the North wall and traveling to the comer of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

By inspection, the SWEs determined that the crack does not appear to be in line with the skid anchor bolt. The pedestal shows no cracking.There is no separation in the crack. The anchor bolts associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support in question are not expected to act in tension, but rather shear. By inspection of the support it is designed to restrict movement in only two directions (both being parallel to the floor). Both of these directions will have a shear force. The crack will only affect the pullout strength (tension) of the anchors and will not directly affect the shear strength of the anchors.The other crack extends from the comer of a seismic pipe support to the corner of a Booster Pump Pedestal.

This crack appears to be in line with the anchor bolt associated with the floor mounted seismic pipe support. The crack does not appear to be in line with the Booster Pump skid anchor bolt. No visible cracking is present on the skid pedestal.

There is no separation in this crack.Neither crack appears to be in line with the anchor bolts located on either Booster Pump Skid. Hypothetically if the cracks met an anchor bolt it would affect the pullout strength of the anchor. However, this is not the case since neither crack meets an anchor bolt. Therefore since neither the shear strength or the pull out strength is affected, the cracks donot affect the seismic qualification of the SWBP floor mounting.RHRSW system remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 228 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06651 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 229 of 291

.Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-06651 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N 10/01/2012 07:52 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 230 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06654 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Phone: 3620 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 14:26 Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 14:47 Condition

==

Description:==

SW INSTRUMENT RACK ANCHOR CORROSION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-By resulted in the observation that corrosion is present on the instrument rack legs for three of the four pumping systems. The instrument racks are located on the South side of each booster pump skid, aligned in the North-South direction.

The North leg of each instrument rack (nearest to the pump), with the exception of the far West Instrument Rack, has corrosion present near the base of the leg. The extent of the corrosion could not be verified since the racks are heavily painted. Some of the anchor bolt heads appear to be corroded or missing beneath the paint.The far West Instrument Rack was inspected and per the SWEs judgment no issue was present without a visual inspection after removal of the paint.Systems Engineering was consulted to determine that the following components are located on the racks: CNS-SW-PS-385AiB/C/D

? Pump Suction low pressure alarm only CNS-SW-PS-386AfB/C/D

? Pump Discharge low pressure alarm only CNS-SW-PI-117A/B/C/D

? Pump Discharge local pressure indication CNS-SW-PI-385A/B/C/D

? Pump Suction local pressuring indication All of these instruments are essential for pressure boundary only. If these fail and fall over, it will not interact with any of the pumps.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Corrosion/Erosion Protection requirements not met.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Contacted Control Room STE, contacted System Engineer, and contacted DED Civil.Suggested Action

Description:

Remove paint at the base of the instrument racks and consult DED to inspect the extent of the corrosion condition.

EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code SW Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 REFERENCE ITEMS: Revision 0 Type Code Item Desc Attachment ENMIA R TThr) r'P_rNg 1I_)n-) I in Page 231 of 291 Entegy I CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-06654 r-REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc WHITE-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type PROGRAM FUNCTION REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code P501 I Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 232 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06654 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 14:47 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/4/2012 7:27 Summary

Description:

SW INSTRUMENT RACK ANCHOR CORROSION Condition:

During the 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) were walking down the area surrounding the Service Water Booster Pump C. This Area Walk-By resulted in the observation that corrosion is present on the instrument rack legs for three of the four pumping systems. The instrument racks are located on the South side of each booster pump skid, aligned in the North-South direction.

The North leg of each instrument rack (nearest to the pump), with the exception of the far West Instrument Rack, has corrosion present near the base of the leg. The extent of the corrosion could not be verified since the racks are heavily painted. Some of the anchor bolt heads appear to be corroded or missing beneath the paint.The far West Instrument Rack was inspected and per the SWEs judgment no issue was present without a visual inspection after removal of the paint.Systems Engineering was consulted to determine that the following components are located on the racks: CNS-SW-PS-385A/B/C/D

? Pump Suction low pressure alarm only CNS-SW-PS-386A/B/C/D

? Pump Discharge low pressure alarm only CNS-SW-PI-1 17A/B/C/D

? Pump Discharge local pressure indication CNS-SW-PI-385A/B/C/D

? Pump Suction local pressuring indication All of these instruments are essential for pressure boundary only. If these fail and fall over, it will not interact with any of the pumps.Photos can be found in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement not met: Corrosion/Erosion Protection requirements not met.Method of Discovery:

Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-EI1 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 233 of 291 Entetgy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06654 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 09/28/2012 21:33 Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 21:55 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to provide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

The corrosion identified by this CR is much less severe than that identified in the Service Water Pump Room associated with similar instrument racks. In each case, at least two intact bolts remain to attach one of the stanchions to the floor.The other stanchion has all four bolts fully intact and not corroded.Construction of these instrument racks is similar to those in the Service Water Pump Rooms. However, the design seismic loading is much lower in the Control Building Basement at 0.2g (compared to 3g in the SWPR). Since the materials are similar, the corrosion is less severe and the seimic loading is significantly lower, the calculations performed for the Operability Evaluation in CR-CNS-2012-06208 show that there is significant margin available to support OPERABILITY of the pressure boundary function of these instruments in the Control Building basement.More details are available in the attached response to EN-DC-1 12 and in the OE attached to CA#1 of CR-CNS-2012-06208.

The RHRSW System remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description EN-DC- 112 response Operability Checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 234 of 291 Enteggy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-06654 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 235 of 291 REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06654 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

10/01/2012 15:03 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 236 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-06657 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Phone: 4028255724 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 09/28/2012 14:54 Initiated Date: 09/28/2012 14:57 Condition

==

Description:==

SW-MOV-MO89B FLEX HOSE SHORT During the walkdown of SW-MOV-MO89B for the Seismic Walkdowns under the 50.54(0 letter distributed by the NRC, it appeared that the flex hose attached to the Limitorque operator of the valve did not provide adequate slack to prevent damage during a seismic event. NEDC 89-1324 Revision 4 was evaluated to determine the maximum amount of displacement during a SSE seismic event. After reviewing the calculation it was found that the maximum distance the operator would move is 0.014 inches in the "z" "y" direction.

Attached to this condition report are the cover sheet of the calculation and the two applicable sections of the document which note the movement of the valve. Due to the minimal displacement caused during a seismic event, the flexible hose will tighten but not be pulled from either end that it is connected to. Photographs of this area have been placed in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement Not Met: Flexible hose appears to not have adequate amount of slack prior to reviewing the calculation.

Method of Discovery:

During the Seismic Walkdowns performed under NRC guidance documented within the 50.54(0)letter.Immediate Action

Description:

Reviewed NEDC 89-1324 Revision 4 which contains the ADL Pipe Stress analysis for the run in question.Suggested Action

Description:

None. By evaluation after reviewing the calculation, it has been found that the displacement of the valve is minor and will not cause the flexible hose to be pulled out.EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code MOV-MO89B 1 2 SW REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-06130 MARGIN MANAGEMENT GREEN-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 PROGRAM FUNCTION P501 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 237 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-06657 Initiated Date: 9/28/2012 14:57 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

SW-MOV-MO89B FLEX HOSE SHORT During the walkdown of SW-MOV-MO89B for the Seismic Walkdowns under the 50.54(f) letter distributed by the NRC, it appeared that the flex hose attached to the Limitorque operator of the valve did not provide adequate slack to prevent damage during a seismic event. NEDC 89-1324 Revision 4 was evaluated to determine the maximum amount of displacement during a SSE seismic event. After reviewing the calculation it was found that the maximum distance the operator would move is 0.014 inches in the "z" "y" direction.

Attached to this condition report are the cover sheet of the calculation and the two applicable sections of the document which note the movement of the valve. Due to the minimal displacement caused during a seismic event, the flexible hose will tighten but not be pulled from either end that it is connected to. Photographs of this area have been placed in T:\Plant Emergent Issues\50.54(F)

Seismic Walkdown Photos (CRs).Requirement Not Met: Flexible hose appears to not have adequate amount of slack prior to reviewing the calculation.

Method of Discovery:

During the Seismic Walkdowns performed under NRC guidance documented within the 50.54(f)letter.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-06130.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 238 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06657 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W Approved By: Long,Jerry J 09/28/2012 23:22 09/29/2012 00:42 Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.7.1 applies The RHRSW System is designed to provide cooling water for the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System heat exchangers, required for a safe reactor shutdown following a Design Basis Accident (DBA) or transient.

The RHRSW System is operated whenever the RHR heat exchangers are required to operate in the shutdown cooling or suppression pool cooling mode. The pressure from the pumps is greater than RHR pressure so that any tube leakage in the heat exchanger is into RHR rather than being discharged to the environment.

The RHRSW System removes heat from the suppression pool via the RHR System to limit the suppression pool temperature and primary containment pressure following a LOCA. This ensures that the primary containment can perform its function of limiting the release of radioactive materials to the environment following a LOCA. The RHRSW System consists of two independent and redundant subsystems, each with two 4000 gpm pumps, a suction source, valves, piping, heat exchanger, and associated instrumentation.

Either of the two subsystems is capable of providing the required cooling capacity with one pump operating to maintain safe shutdown conditions.

Based on information provided by the originator and included in the "Description of Condition" this condition does not affect the OPERABILITY of the RHRSW system. There is sufficient slack in the cable to accommodate the motion induced by the design basis seismic event.Approval Comments: Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 239 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-06657 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-06130 10/02/2012 13:27 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 240 of 291 Entergy, REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-06657 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified.

10/01/2012 07:54 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 241 of 291 I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07392 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 10/17/2012 15:02 Originator Phone: 3643 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/17/2012 15:05 Condition

==

Description:==

LOOSE CONDUIT SUPPORT CLAMP MS-AOV-AO80B Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting component inspection on MS-AOV-AO8OB.

During the inspection it was observed that the conduit Split Strap clamp on the support for the AOV was free to move parallel along the horizontal strut. This is due to worn out split strap ears, therefore the clamp does not provide restraint in the "slip-along" direction.

The SWEs find this condition to be acceptable since the conduit cannot dislodge from the support since the clamp can restrain the conduit in the "Pull-Out" and Slip-Thru" directions.

Requirement not met: Failure to properly mount conduit clamp to support Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an inspection of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Initiated Condition Report and STE.See attached Photo.Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that the Clamp be replaced with a new split strap type clamp.EQUIPMENT:

Tag Name AOV-AO80B Tag Suffix Name Component Code Process System Code I 0 MS REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-07398 CR-CNS-2012-07561 WHITE-O TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code 1 Attachments:

Immediate Action Description Photo Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 242 of 291 Entergy CORRECTIVE ACTION I CR-CNS-2012-07392 CA Number: I Assigned By: Assigned To: Subassigned To : Site CNS CNS CNS Group CA&A Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS JName I Dewhirst,Linda Estrada,Roman M Marotz,Mitchell M Originated By: Hathaway,Tricia D Performed By: Subperformed By: Approved By: Closed By: 10/20/2012 15:43:30 Current Due Date: 11/16/2012 Initial Due Date: 11/18/2012 CA Type: DISP -CA CA Priority: Plant Constraint:

NON-OUTAGE CA

Description:

Validate and establish action plan necessary to fix identified condition.

Ensure concerns from CR-CNS-2012-07398 and CR-CNS-2012-07561 are adequately addressed along with this CR.CA REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code PRIORITY Response: Subresponse:

Closure Comments: Description 4 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 243 of 291 lEntergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07392 Initiated Date: 10/17/2012 15:05 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

C Closed by: Summary

Description:

LOOSE CONDUIT SUPPORT CLAMP MS-AOV-AO8OB Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting component inspection on MS-AOV-AO80B.

During the inspection it was observed that the conduit Split Strap clamp on the support for the AOV was free to move parallel along the horizontal strut. This is due to worn out split strap ears, therefore the clamp does not provide restraint in the "slip-along" direction.

The SWEs find this condition to be acceptable since the conduit cannot dislodge from the support since the clamp can restrain the conduit in the "Pull-Out" and Slip-Thru" directions.

Requirement not met: Failure to properly mount conduit clamp to support Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an inspection of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 244 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07392 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle Approved By: Stough,James L Operability

==

Description:==

TS 3.6.1.3 potentially applies.10/18/2012 20:49 10/18/2012 22:24 The function of the PCIVs, in combination with other accident mitigation systems, is to limit fission product release during and following postulated Design Basis Accidents (DBAs) to within limits. Primary containment isolation within the time limits specified for those isolation valves designed to close automatically ensures that the release of radioactive material to the environment will be consistent with the assumptions used in the analyses for a DBA. MSIVs are required to close on a Group 1 signal (high steam tunnel temperature, high steam line flow, low-level 1 Reactor water level, low condenser vacuum, low steam line pressure).

These conditions are indicative of a potential steam line break outside PC, LOCA inside PC, or loss of heat sink. The MSIVs are air operated to open, and springs with air assist to close.MS-AOV-AO8OB, MS ISO VALVE B INBOARD. Per discussions with DED the conduit is effectively captured by the geometry of the conduit, clamp and hangar. The Clamp/Hangar/Unistrut assembly is assembled properly but loose at the unistrut to hangar point. The hangar is a single bolt clamp that is attached to unistrut which allows for positioning during installation and disassembly.

The clamp has a tee which rides in the groove of the unistrut and when tightened locks the assembly in place. While the clamp tee is loose the conduit cannot move due to the hangar construction.

Additionally, the hangars above and below are rigidly mounted.Based on the above MS-AOV-AO80B is Operable for this condition.

Per 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description checklist Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 245 of 291 ASSIGNMENTS CR-CNS-2012-07392 Version: 1 Significance Code: C Classification Code: RCR (FIX)Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

XIII.B. 1 Tie RE-27 Seismic Walkdown issues to this CR.10/20/2012 15:17 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 246 of 291 I Htoy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-07392 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: LOSF NA Performed By: McCutchen,Edward L Reportability

==

Description:==

10/18/2012 09:19 No loss of nuclear safety function.

Condition affects safety related equipment, but does not affect ability to perform the safety function.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the cause evaluation, if performed, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (elm, dnm)Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 247 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07398 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 10/17/2012 16:39 Originator Phone: 3643 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/17/2012 16:46 Condition

==

Description:==

Tube Tray Detachment at Support Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Drywell. During the walk-by it was observed that a tubing tray was disconnected from its support. The tube track serves several small diameter copper tubes. The location of the detached tube tray is directly above ventilation louver DW 1B-$4.See attached photos.Requirement not met: Failure to properly maintain support of the copper tubing.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Initiated Condition Report and contacted Control Room STE.Suggested Action

Description:

It is recommended that Tube Tray be reattached to the support.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-07392 WHITE-O TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code I Attachments:

Condition Description Photos Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 248 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-07398 Initiated Date: 10/17/2012 16:46 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

Tube Tray Detachment at Support Condition:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting "Area Walk-Bys" in the Drywell. During the walk-by it was observed that a tubing tray was disconnected from its support. The tube track serves several small diameter copper tubes. The location of the detached tube tray is directly above ventilation louver DW1 B-S4.See attached photos.Requirement not met: Failure to properly maintain support of the copper tubing.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "Area Walk-By" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 249 of 291

'Entergy I OPERABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-07398 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: NOT REQUIRED Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle Approved By: Stough,James L 10/18/2012 20:09 10/18/2012 20:59 Operability

==

Description:==

Per discussions with Engineering the tubing was abandoned in place by Minor Design Change 84-150A. This change isolated the tubing from the pneumatics system.The tubing is not safety related and performs no active or passive safety function that would either prevent or mitigate any analyzed accident or transient.

Also, the tubing performs no support function that would cause safety related or important to safety equipment to become inoperable or incapable of performing the intended safety or support function.

Per 0.5OPS, this condition screens as Operability Determination NOT REQUIRED.

Per 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 250 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-07398 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 10/20/2012 15:17 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 251 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07398 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: NON-SAFETY EQUII Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 10/19/2012 07:23 Reportability

==

Description:==

Not an SSC that affects safety function, and does not meet criteria for reportability.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 252 of 291 Entegy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07552 I Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 12:44 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 12:48 Condition

==

Description:==

RW-AOV-A83 SEISMIC INTERACTION During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walkdowns of RW-AOV-A83.

During the walk-by it was observed that the aluminum inlet line at the elbow of a compression fitting of the AOV was approximately 1/8" from a nearby B-Line support. During a seismic event, the elbow could potentially, depending on the severity of an earthquake, strike the B-Line unistrut and damage the fitting. This could potentially cause the valve to not receive the necessary air to perform its intended function.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: The inlet line of the AOV does not have a safe seismic interaction distance.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RW-AOV-A83.

Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the SWC associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

B-Line unsitrut should be cut to allow the support to still function as intended and to allow enough clearance for the AOV to move in a safe manner during a seismic event.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-07392 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code I Attachments:

Condition Description RW-AOV-A83 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 253 of 291 Entew I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07552 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 12:48 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

RW-AOV-A83 SEISMIC INTERACTION During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walkdowns of RW-AOV-A83.

During the walk-by it was observed that the aluminum inlet line at the elbow of a compression fitting of the AOV was approximately 1/8" from a nearby B-Line support. During a seismic event, the elbow could potentially, depending on the severity of an earthquake, strike the B-Line unistrut and damage the fitting. This could potentially cause the valve to not receive the necessary air to perform its intended function.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: The inlet line of the AOV does not have a safe seismic interaction distance.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RW-AOV-A83.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 254 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07552 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W Approved By: Stough,James L 10/23/2012 09:46 10/24/2012 01:32 Operability

==

Description:==

CNS-0-RW-AO-AO83, DW FL DR SUMP DISCH.This is being declared INOPERABLE pending resolution by Engineering or MNT. EN-DC- 112 submitted and response is being developed.

This will be tracked on TS-12-01-RE27 PCIV, INST.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 255 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-07552 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Performed By: Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS 00/00/0000 00:00 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 256 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07552 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By : Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 11:30 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the evaluation, upon its completion, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (dnm 10-23-12 pending Ops review)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 257 of 291 Enter,,gy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07558 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Phone: 4028255724 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 13:07 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 13:24 Condition

==

Description:==

PC-MOV-1301MV SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-downs of PC-MOV-1301MV.

During the walk-by it was observed that a 3-way support (SBNI-H66A) is located at the valve bolted bonnet. This is probably not an IAW valve SQR. It was also found that the 3-way support is located 3.5 inches above the center line 1 inch pipe. The stress analysis shows approximately 14 inches above the centerline of the one inch pipe.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Typically during shake table tests, the valve is support in a specific way. The valve in question does not appear to be a typical support that one would use in a shake table test. In addition, the valve supports do not match current seismic evaluation.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of PC-MOV- 1301 MV.Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the SWC associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

All associated documents should be reviewed to determine whether the valve has been analyzed for its current configuration.

The drawings and all associated calculations should be reviewed to determine whether the current configuration is acceptable.

If the current configuration is acceptable, then DWG 0640-012TAPSBLO3 Revision 0 should be updated.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED Tie to CR 2012-07392 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 Attachments:

Condition Description PC-MOV-1301MV Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 258 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07558 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 13:24 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

PC-MOV- 1301 MV SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-downs of PC-MOV-1301MV.

During the walk-by it was observed that a 3-way support (SBNI-H66A) is located at the valve bolted bonnet. This is probably not an IAW valve SQR. It was also found that the 3-way support is located 3.5 inches above the center line 1 inch pipe. The stress analysis shows approximately 14 inches above the centerline of the one inch pipe.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Typically during shake table tests, the valve is support in a specific way. The valve in question does not appear to be a typical support that one would use in a shake table test. In addition, the valve supports do not match current seismic evaluation.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of PC-MOV- 1301 MV.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 259 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07558 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 10/23/2012 09:14 Approved By: Stough,James L 10/24/2012 01:36 Operability

==

Description:==

This is being declared INOPERABLE pending resolution by Engineering.

EN-DC-i 12 submitted 10/19/12.This will be tracked on TS-12-01-RE27 PCIV, INST.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 260 of 291 EnteIgy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-07558 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Performed By: Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS 00/00/0000 00:00 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 261 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-07558 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 16:40 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the evaluation, upon its completion, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (dnm 10-23-12 pending Ops review)Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment E Page 262 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-07561 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 13:46 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 13:49 Condition

==

Description:==

RMV-AOV- 11AV SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-Downs of RMV-AOV-11AV.

During the walk-by it was observed that the valve was supported on the operator.

The support for the valve was bolted to the bosses.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Typically during shake table tests, the valve is supported in a specific way. The valve in question does not appear to be a typical support that one would use in a shake table test or seismic analysis.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RMV-AOV- 11 AV.Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the SWC associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

Engineering needs to review the current configuration of the valve to confirm that it is an IAW/SQR valve. The pipe stress analysis should also be reviewed to determine whether or not this configuration has been analyzed in the pipe stress analysis.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item CR NUMBER TIED CR-C TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT Desc NS- 2012-07392 Trend Code I Attachments:

Condition Description RMV-AOV- 11AV Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 263 of 291 Enteray ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07561 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 13:49 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: HathawayTricia D 10/23/2012 17:05 Summary uescripnon:

RMV-AOV- 11 AV SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-Downs of RMV-AOV- 11 AV. During the walk-by it was observed that the valve was supported on the operator.

The support for the valve was bolted to the bosses.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Typically during shake table tests, the valve is supported in a specific way. The valve in question does not appear to be a typical support that one would use in a shake table test or seismic analysis.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RMV-AOV- 11 AV.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-07392.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 264 of 291

ýEnteg OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07561 I OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: ADMIN -NA Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Sayler,Kyle Approved By: Stough,James L 10/21/2012 00:19 10/21/2012 00:28 Operability

==

Description:==

This CR was written to document a question with regards to an atypical piping support. Upon further investigation, see attached engineering evaluation, the piping support, RMV-H10, is in accordance with the as-built configuration, shown on isometric drawing X2631-201, which is used in NEDC 93-074. No degraded or non-conforming condition exists. Per 0.5OPS this condition screens as Admin NA.Per 2.0.5 and NUREG 1022 this condition is not reportable.

Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description Engineering Evaluation Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 265 of 291 J 7 ntergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-07561 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 10/23/2012 14:35 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 266 of 291 Entergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-07561 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: ADMIN Performed By : McCutchen,Edward L 10/21/2012 17:12 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is of an administrative nature and does not involve an equipment, radiological, nor security issue.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 267 of 291 Entergy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07564 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 14:01 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 14:05 Condition

==

Description:==

RHR-MOV-MO21B SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-Downs of RHR-MOV-MO12B.

During the walk-by it was observed that a seismic support kicker was located approximately 1 inch from the bonnet of RHR-MOV-MO2 lB.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: The seismic support kicker is in close proximity to RHR-MOV-MO12B.

During a seismic event, there is a potential for the valve to strike the kicker and could damage it.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RHR-MOV-MO 12B.Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the SWC associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

Engineering needs to review the pipe stress analysis for this particular spot and determine the maximum displacement that could occur during the worst design scenario in order to verify that interaction between the pipe and kicker will not occur.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-07392 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT Trend Code I Attachments:

Condition Description RHR-MOV-MO 12B Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 268 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07564 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 14:05 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

RHR-MOV-MO21B SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Seismic Walk-Downs of RHR-MOV-MO12B.

During the walk-by it was observed that a seismic support kicker was located approximately 1 inch from the bonnet of RHR-MOV-MO21B.

Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: The seismic support kicker is in close proximity to RHR-MOV-MO12B.

During a seismic event, there is a potential for the valve to strike the kicker and could damage it.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to perform an inspection of RHR-MOV-MO 12B.Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 269 of 291 OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07564 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: OPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 10/23/2012 15:57 Approved By: Stough,James L 10/24/2012 01:38 Operability

==

Description:==

LCOs 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.6.2.3, 3.9.7, 3.9.8 and TLCO T3.6.1 potentially apply The safety design bases of the RHR system are to: 1. Restore and maintain the coolant inventory in the reactor vessel after a loss of coolant accident as required for core cooling in conjunction with other Emergency Core Cooling systems (Low Pressure Coolant Injection Mode, LPCI).2. Provide cooling for the suppression pool and thereby remove heat from the containment following a loss of coolant accident to reduce containment pressure (either Suppression Pool Cooling Mode or spray mode can be used to accomplish this function).

3. Maintain suppression pool temperature during normal operation to within the limits assumed in the "Station Safety Analysis," (USAR Chapter XIV).4. The suppression pool is the source of water for the LPCI mode of operation of the RHR system in order to provide a complete recycle path for water lost from the reactor vessel following reflooding.

5. To provide a high degree of assurance that the RHR system operates satisfactorily during a loss of coolant accident, each active component shall be capable of being tested during operation of the nuclear system.6. Provide cooling for the drywell and thereby remove heat from the primary containment following a loss of coolant accident to reduce containment temperature.

RHR-MO-21B is the RHR HX B DRAIN TO SUPPRESSION CHAMBER, and is permanently deenergized closed. This valve is abondoned in place and not used. However the piping remains attached to the system. Per the attached response to EN-DC- 112 12-031, one inch is more than sufficient clearance for this location.RHR System B remains OPERABLE.Approval Comments: Concur Attachments:

Operability Description Operability checklist EN-DC- 112 approval EN-DC- 112 response Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 270 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-07564 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Performed By: Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS 00/00/0000 00:00 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 271 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07564 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: OPERABLE Performed By : Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 16:41 Reportability

==

Description:==

Component or System remains operable, and no past operability issue identified. (dnm 10-23-12 pending Ops review)Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 272 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07567 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Phone: 4028255724 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 14:18 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 14:41 Condition

==

Description:==

3 INCH CRD RETURN LINE CANTILEVER During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that a 3 inch CRD Return Line had an extensive cantilever.

MDC No.77-100 capped the 3 inch CRD Return Line inside and outside the Drywell. The attached piping outside the Drywell (see RCI DWG CP-002, Sht. 3)in the Reactor Building was abandoned in place at both ends. Minimal guidance to perform this is provided in the MDC.The free-end riser near Col. 6K at elevation 903? in the RB has a length of over 10 feet and could present seismic interaction issues with nearby CRD SSEL components below in the SE Quad. The RCI calculation for a 3 inch CRD return line outside the Drywell could not be located in records.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Extensive cantilever from 3 inch CRD Return Line.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the Area Walk-by associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

Add additional guide support near (approximately 1 foot) free end or cut the pipe off (approximately one foot) to the existing guide support on the south wall.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc CR NUMBER TIED CR-CNS-2012-07392 TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code REPORT WEIGHT 1 Attachments:

Condition Description 3 Inch CRD Return Line Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 273 of 291 Entergy ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07567 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 14:41 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

3 INCH CRD RETURN LINE CANTILEVER During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by it was observed that a 3 inch CRD Return Line had an extensive cantilever.

MDC No.77-100 capped the 3 inch CRD Return Line inside and outside the Drywell. The attached piping outside the Drywell (see RCI DWG CP-002, Sht. 3)in the Reactor Building was abandoned in place at both ends. Minimal guidance to perform this is provided in the MDC.The free-end riser near Col. 6K at elevation 903? in the RB has a length of over 10 feet and could present seismic interaction issues with nearby CRD SSEL components below in the SE Quad. The RCI calculation for a 3 inch CRD return line outside the Drywell could not be located in records.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Extensive cantilever from 3 inch CRD Return Line.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 274 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07567 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 10/23/2012 09:29 Approved By: Stough,James L 10/24/2012 01:43 Operability

==

Description:==

This is being declared INOPERABLE pending resloution by Engineering.

EN-DC-i 12 submitted 10/21/12.

This will be tracked on TS 12-RE27 Startup Restraint-0 1.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 275 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-07567 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Performed By: Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS 00/00/0000 00:00 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 276 of 291 Entergy REPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07567 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 16:41 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the evaluation, upon its completion, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (dnm 10-23-12 pending Ops and peer review)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 277 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT CR-CNS-2012-07576 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 15:38 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 16:09 Condition

==

Description:==

PC-PRV-PCV631 SEISMIC RESTRAINT ISSUE During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV631 it was observed that the component piping on RH?s appeared to lack seismic restraints.

Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Piping requires more seismic restraints.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the Area Walk-by associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

Analyze the need for seismic supports and add as necessary to provide adequate protection to the forces produced by an earthquake as discussed in applicable CNS design documents.

REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code CR NUMBER TIED MARGIN MANAGEMENT Item Desc CR-CNS-2012-07392 WHITE-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type REPORT WEIGHT KEYWORDS PROGRAM FUNCTION Trend Code I SEISMIC P301 Attachments:

Condition Description PC-PRV-PCV631 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 278 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07576 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 16:09 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Hathaway,Tricia D 10/25/2012 16:43 Summary

Description:

PC-PRV-PCV631 SEISMIC RESTRAINT ISSUE During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV631 it was observed that the component piping on RH?s appeared to lack seismic restraints.

Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: Piping requires more seismic restraints.

Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

This condition report has been closed to Condition Report CR-CNS-2012-07392.

Correction of this condition will be accomplished under the actions of that condition report. This and all CRs will be reviewed by the responsible department and by CA&A to identify trends requiring additional actions. If you have questions about the disposition of this CR, contact your supervisor or manager. If additional information is still needed, contact the CA&A manager and/or staff.Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 279 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07576 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 10/23/2012 09:00 Approved By: Stough,James L 10/24/2012 01:45 Operability

==

Description:==

This is being declared INOPERABLE pending resolution by Engineering.

EN-DC- 112 submitted for additional information to support OPERABILITY on 10/22/12.This will be tracked on TS12-01-RE27 SRV INCL ADS/LLS.PC-PRV-PCV631 is the NITROGEN SUPPLY TO DRYWELL INSTRUMENT AIR HEADER, which serves MSIV's and SRV's.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 280 of 291 Entergy A S S I G N M E N T S CR-CNS-2012-07576 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Performed By: Anderson,Donny L Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 10/25/2012 15:06 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 281 of 291

ýEntergy I REPORTABILITY I CR-CNS-2012-07576 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By: Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 16:42 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the evaluation, upon its completion, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (dnm 10-23-12 pending Ops review)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 282 of 291 Entegy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-07578 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Phone: 4028255724 Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Operability Required:

Y Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Reportability Required:

Y Discovered Date: 10/19/2012 16:09 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 16:20 Condition

==

Description:==

RW PIPING ELBOW TOO CLOSE TO SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV631 it was observed that the Type 1 hanger below PC-170 is too close to the RW piping. The elbow in question is located between IA-567 and IA-F-DWA.

By observation, the hanger has no clearance between itself and the elbow. During a seismic event, the hangers will collide into each other and could cause damage to the systems that they are associated with.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: No clearance was found between the elbow and Type 1 support.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(o Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Documented this issue on the Area Walk-by associated with this particular component.

The seismic walk-down team reviewed the pictures to determine if an issue existed.Suggested Action

Description:

The Type 1 support should be moved away from the elbow and all design documents should be updated to reflect the new configuration.

If the Type 1 support is unable to be moved due to interferences then another support should be placed on the system to replace the current support.REFERENCE ITEMS: Type Code Item Desc MARGIN MANAGEMENT WHITE-D TRENDING (For Reference Purposes Only): Trend Type Trend Code KEYWORDS SEISMIC PROGRAM FUNCTION P301 REPORT WEIGHT 1 Attachments:

Condition Description PC-PRV-PCV631 AWB Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 283 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-07578 Initiated Date: 10/19/2012 16:20 Owner Site and Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS Current Contact: Current Significance:

D Closed by: Summary

Description:

RW PIPING ELBOW TOO CLOSE TO SUPPORT During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting Area Walk-Bys.

During the walk-by of PC-PRV-PCV631 it was observed that the Type 1 hanger below PC- 170 is too close to the RW piping. The elbow in question is located between IA-567 and IA-F-DWA.

By observation, the hanger has no clearance between itself and the elbow. During a seismic event, the hangers will collide into each other and could cause damage to the systems that they are associated with.Refer to the attached picture.Requirements Not Met: No clearance was found between the elbow and Type 1 support.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(0 Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an ?Area Walk-By? in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 284 of 291 Entergy OPERABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07578 OperabilityVersion:

1 Operability Code: INOPERABLE Immediate Report Code: NONE Performed By: Giles,Roy W 10/23/2012 09:04 Approved By: Stough,James L 10/24/2012 01:46 Operability

==

Description:==

This is being declared INOPERABLE pending resolution by Engineering.

EN-DC-1 12 submitted for additional information to support OPERABILITY on 10/22/12.This will be tracked on TS12-01-RE27 SRV INCL ADS/LLS.Approval Comments: Concur Engineering Evaluation 12-EIB Revision 0 Attachment E Page 285 of 291 Entergy I A S S I G N M E N T S I CR-CNS-2012-07578 Version: 1 Significance Code: D Classification Code: TREND Owner Site and Group: CNS Performed By: Assignment

==

Description:==

Tie to CR 2012-07392 PLT Eng Design Mgmt CNS 00/00/0000 00:00 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 286 of 291 Entegy IREPORTABILITY CR-CNS-2012-07578 Reportability Version: 1 Report Number: Report Code: NOT REPORTABLE Boilerplate Code: TS Performed By : Madsen,David N 10/23/2012 17:12 Reportability

==

Description:==

This is not a condition prohibited by TS and is not reportable.

Licensing will open an action to itself (based on CRG classification of Cat 'A' or 'B') to review the evaluation, upon its completion, and determine if new evidence reveals a reportable condition. (dnm 10-23-12 pending engineering information to be provided to Ops tab)Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 287 of 291 I Entegy I CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-09273 Originator:

Jackson,Justin L Originator Site Group: CNS .PLT Eng Design Programs Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Ocken,Trevor Discovered Date: 11/15/2012 18:21 Originator Phone: 4028255724 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 11/15/2012 18:30 Condition

==

Description:==

PIPING INTERACTION DISCREPANCIES During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down teams were conducting area walk-bys.

During the area walk-by of SW-AOV-TCV45 1A, it was observed that a Nitrogen Purge Line and piping for the Radwaste Tip Room drains were spaced less than 0.5 inches apart. The piping in question is located on the 881' elevation on top of the Torus NE quadrant.

Photos have been attached to this condition report in order to show the spacing and the piping in question.During a seismic event, the piping may interact with each other and damage the stainless steel nitrogen purge line. Based off of observation, there will be no damage to the Radwaste drain line due to the mass of the piping in respect to the Nitrogen purge line. Neither component is associated with the safe shut down of the plant.Requirements Not Met: Having a spacing difference of less than 0.5 inches could damage the primary containment boundary during a seismic event.Method of Discovery:

During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walk-downs, the walk-down team was required to do an "area walk-by" in the vicinity of Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) components.

Immediate Action

Description:

Wrote this condition report and contacted the Shift Technical Engineer in the Control Room.Suggested Action

Description:

The Nitrogen Purge Line should be rerouted in a manner that maintains a minimum of 1-2 inches from any other piping component.

This will prevent damage to the piping in the event of a seismic situation.

Attachments:

Condition Description AWC WB-006 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 288 of 291 Entergy ADMIN CR-CNS-2012-09273 Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI1 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 289 of 291 Entergy CONDITION REPORT I CR-CNS-2012-09274 Originator:

Marotz,Mitchell M Originator Site Group: CNS PLT Eng Design Proj Staff CNS Supervisor Name: Wolken,Brian Discovered Date: 11/15/2012 18:29 Originator Phone: 2527 Operability Required:

Y Reportability Required:

Y Initiated Date: 11/15/2012 18:39 Condition

==

Description:==

ANCHOR BOLTS NOT FULLY ENGAGED During 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns, Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWE) were completing a Area Walk-By of the Battery Room on 903 of the Control Building.

During the walk-by it was observed that the 125V DC Distribution Panel B Transfer Switch anchor bolts were not fully engaged. The SWE's, upon further investigation, found that the bolts were not loose, the transfer switch has several conduits on the upper half of it, and the transfer switch is flush against the wall.The anchor bolts appear to be bottoming out in the anchor since they are not loose. The conduit leaving the top of the transfer switch is immediately supported by a Type A conduit support which provides support in the event of an earthquake to resist overturning.

Also, it is likely that there is bolting on the backside of the transfer switch to the wall. This could not be confirmed without opening the transfer switch cabinet.Per Engineering Judgment, the SWE's concluded that the transfer switch with the bolts not fully engaged will be adequately anchored as to restrict overturning during a seismic event due to the conduit support directly above the transfer switch, the size of the conduits tying into the stransfer switch. The anchor bolts will still resist shear in their current configuration.

See Attached Photos.Requirement not met: Bolts anchored into the slab on the 125V DC Distribution Panel B Transfer Switch are not fully engaged.Method of Discover: Discovered during 50.54(f) Section 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns.

Immediate Action

Description:

Initiated Condition Report and contacted Control Room STE.Suggested Action

Description:

Replace the anchor bolts with shorter bolts as to allow full engagement or install washers on the bolts as to get a flush fit.Attachments:

Condition Description Photos Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 290 of 291 Entergy I ADMIN I CR-CNS-2012-09274 Remarks

Description:

Closure

Description:

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment E Page 291 of 291 ZfACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment F Peer Review Team Qualifications Attachment F, Page 1 of 20 Revision 0 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 2 of 20 Mr. Greg Hostetter, CAPM Senior Engineering Consultant EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

Mr. Hostetter has over ten years of nuclear industry, research and related experience.

His areas of expertise include regulatory compliance support, environmental qualification (EQ) and aging management, Appendix R fire protection, thermal hydraulic analysis, room heat-up calculations, computational modeling, project management and controls, configuration control, corrective action, and materials science. This work has been done at both BWR and PWR nuclear facilities in the United States and for an international NSSS vendor.His material science background includes metals, glass / ceramics, liquid crystals / electronic materials, and polymers.

This work involved activities varying from process improvements to achieve desired materials properties to computational modeling of energy states and molecular configurations.

Mr. Hostetter is the office lead for information technology (IT) including software testing / verification, and day-to-day IT technical support. He is the chair of IEEE Nuclear Power Engineering Committee Working Group 6.1 on Accident Monitoring Instrumentation (IEEE Std 497) and led the working group through a successful revision of the standard.

He is also performing research in support of new plant licensing

[design certification (DCD), combined license (COL) application].

EDUCATION MSE, Materials Science and Engineering, University of Michigan BS, Materials Engineering, University of Cincinnati REGISTRATIONS

/ CERTIFICATIONS I TRAINING Engineer-in-Training (EIT) -Ohio, 2000 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Certified by LeBlond and Associates, LLC -2007 GOTHIC Training Course by Numerical Applications, Inc -2007 HVAC Basics -TRANE- 2009 Project Management 101 -Tetra Tech -2010 Loss Prevention and Control -Tetra Tech -2011 Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM No. 1463112) -PMI -2011 CORPORATION PROJECT EXPERIENCE Senior Engineering Consultant, 2011 to Present Project Manager, 2010 to Present Tetra Tech, Ann Arbor, MI (formerly Advent Engineering Services)Primary responsibilities include technical lead on thermal hydraulic analyses, project management and client interface

/ program management.

As technical lead for thermal hydraulic analyses, leads a team of engineers responsible for HELB and room heat-up environmental analyses using the GOTHIC computer software for both Design Engineering and Engineering Programs at nuclear operating plants. These analyses include determination of environmental parameters, fluid flow modeling, and evaluation of equipment qualification

/ operability

/functionality within the given environment.

Project management responsibilities include proposal creation, project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, and management of project personnel.

Responsible for managing numerous projects for utility clients that are both short term and multiple year projects, ranging from staff augmentation to task driven projects, overseeing 10-20 engineers.

He is the program manager for all nuclear work with Xcel Energy as well as the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and is responsible for all aspects of the company's interface with the utility from project inception through project closeout.Additional non-technical activities include providing training to engineering and office staff, company marketing and sales, and support of the company QA Program.Page 1 of 4 TETRATECH 06/2012 N Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 3 of 20 Mr. Greg Hostetter, CAPM Senior Engineering Consultant Engineering Consultant, 2009 to 2010 Lead Project Engineer, 2009 to 2010 Advent Engineering Services Responsibilities include technical lead on thermal hydraulic analyses and project management.

As technical lead for thermal hydraulic analyses, leads a team of engineers responsible for HELB and room heat-up environmental analyses using the GOTHIC computer software.

Project management responsibilities include project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, management of project personnel, and primary interface contact for the client. He is responsible for all Advent work with Xcel Energy including Monticello and Prairie Island. Additional non-technical activities include IT coordination and providing training to engineering and office staff.Senior Engineer, 2006 -2009 Project Lead, 2008 -2009 Advent Engineering Services Engineering related responsibilities include performing evaluations, developing calculations, and originating licensing basis document changes in support of EQ Programs at nuclear power plants. Also responsible for developing thermal-hydraulic analyses using the GOTHIC computer software.

Additional technical areas of responsibility include probabilistic risk assessment work, Combined License (COL)Application work and new reactor design certification support.Management activities include being the companies Project Lead at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. Responsibilities as Project Lead include project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, management of project personnel, and primary interface contact for the client. Additional non-technical activities include IT coordination and providing training to engineering and office staff.Engineer Level II, 2002 -2006 Advent Engineering Services Responsibilities included performing engineering evaluations, developing calculations, and originating licensing basis document changes in support of fire protection systems and environmental qualification programs at nuclear power plants. Assisted in resolution of EQ condition reports identified at Davis-Besse during the boric acid release event extended outage.Additional responsibilities included developing traffic engineering analysis and simulations to determine emergency evacuation time estimates for nuclear power facilities.

Non-technical

/ engineering activities include project scheduling and IT coordination.

PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE Graduate Student Research Assistant, 2000 -2002 Martin Research Group, University of Michigan Performed molecular dynamics simulation and modeling.

Used molecule modeling, electron diffraction, and X-ray diffraction to analyze and characterize poly-phenylenebenzobisoxazole (PBO). Also studied rubber toughening of nitro-cellulose and acrylic resins, as well as the structural characterization of novel crystal structure using modeling, transmission electron microscopy, and electron diffraction.

Contractor, 1999 -2000 Air Force Research Labs W.P.A.F.B.

Performed polymer morphology

-microstructure characterization using real-time microscopy and polymerization reaction characterization techniques.

Also performed polymer synthesis reactions.

Undergraduate Researcher, 1999 -2000 Beaucage Research Group, University of Cincinnati Evaluated light scattering and reaction characterization of liquid crystalline materials.

Page 2 of 4 TETRATECH 06/2012 N T R E Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 4 of 20 Mr. Greg Hostetter, CAPM Senior Engineering Consultant Co-Op and Part-time, 1997 -1999 Fusite Division of Emerson Electric Company Preformed project management duties such as organization of personnel and technical report writing, as well as materials testing. Other specific skills gained include formulation and processing of glass, development of brazing techniques for metallurgical experimentation, and microstructure analysis using electron and optical microscopy.

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), Member (2008-Present)

IEEE Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC), Alternate Member (2006-Present)

IEEE NPEC Subcommittee 6 on Safety related Systems, Member (2007-Present)

IEEE NPEC Working Group 6.1 on Accident Monitoring Instrumentation (IEEE Std 497), Working Group Chairman (2009-Present), Working Group Member (2006-Present)

American Nuclear Society (ANS), Member (2006-2008), ANS Michigan Section, Executive Committee Member (2005-2009), Finance Committee Chair (2005-2008), Section Member (2006-present) 2nd International Joint Topical Meeting on Emergency Preparedness

& Response and Robotic & Remote Systems, Technical Program Committee Member (2008)American Physical Society (APS), Member (past)PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS Industry Standards IEEE Std 497-2010, Standard for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear Power Generating Stations, co-authored with IEEE/PES/NPEC WG-6.1 Peer Reviewed Publications Hostetter, G.M., Horvath, D.A., "Transition Temperature Considerations When Extrapolating Safety-Related Equipment Post-Accident Operating Times", IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 51(5), 2347, (2004).Hostetter, G.M., "Molecular Modeling of the Structural Evolution in Poly(paraphenylene benzobisoxazole) (PBO) Fibers" [Master's Thesis], Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan;2002.Conference Presentations Hostetter, G.M., Horvath, D.A., "Accident Monitoring During Severe Accidents", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Horvath, D.A., Hostetter, G.M., "Use of Micro-Void Content Growth Rates to Validate and Dd Value to Electrical Insulation Tan-Delta Aging Testing", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Worblewski, N., Horvath, D.A., Hostetter, G.M., Seamans, S., "Unexpected Anomaly Discovered During Qualification Testing of Teflon (PTFE) in Nuclear SealingApplication", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Page 3 of4 TETRATECH 06/2012N ERTC Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 5 of 20 Mr. Greg Hostetter, CAPM Senior Engineering Consultant Steinman, R.L., Hostetter, G.M., "Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis for the Fermi 2 Emergency Planning Zone", ANS 2004 Annual Meeting Transactions, June 13-17, 2004, Pittsburgh, PA.Hostetter, G.M., Martin, D.C., "Molecular Modeling of Structural Evolution in PBO Fibers" Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 47(1), 197, (2002).Hostetter, G.M., Martin, D.C., "Molecular Modeling of Poly-p-phenylenebenzobisoxazole (PBO) / Water / Phosphoric Acid Ternary Phase Diagram", The University of Michigan Macromolecular Science and Engineering Symposium, 2001.Hostetter, G.M., Drummy, L., Vodak, D., Yaghi, 0., Martin, D.C., "High Resolution Electron Microscopy of Triazine-Tribenzonitrile Organic Frameworks", ISMANAM 2001 (International Symposium on Metastable, Mechanically Alloyed and Nanocrystalline Materials), 2001.Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Reaction

-Induced Phase Separation of Polymer / LC Blends", ANTEC Preprints:

Proceedings of the Society of Plastics Engineering, 58(3), 3808, (2000).Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Morphological Investigation of Two-Phase LC/Polymer Films Formed via Reaction-induced Phase Separation", Bull. Am.Phys. Soc., 45(1), 569, (2000).Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Phase Separation Kinetics and Structure of Reaction-Induced Polymer Dispersed Liquid Crystal Films", ACS Central Regional Meeting, ACS (Amer. Chemical Soc.), 2000.Page4 of 4 ( TETRATECH 06/2012 t.RA.J Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 6 of 20 Norbert Wroblewski Engineer Level II EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

Norbert Wroblewski has four years of experience in the nuclear industry in the areas of mechanical hardware design, engineering calculations, Quality Assurance and outage support. His mechanical design engineering experience includes reactor model construction, repair concept development and modeling, drafting design drawings for manufacturing, design reviews, applying design changes to drawings and documents, and drafting of installation and inspection specifications.

Engineering support experience includes preparing calculations, specifications, procedures, and testing plans. Outage support experience includes review of in-vessel video inspection footage for interferences, and performing time sensitive design changes to expedite outage closure. Work on QA has included the standardization of interference analysis in an Engineering Procedure and the development and implementation of a QA project instruction manual.EDUCATION 2007 MS, Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan 2006 BS, Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University REGISTRATIONSICERTIFICATIONS Completed Mechanical Design Fundamentals (GEH, 2009)Completed BWR Refueling Floor Training (GEH, 2009)CORPORATION PROJECT EXPERIENCE Engineer Level II, 2010 to present Tetra Tech Advent, Ann Arbor, MI Currently providing support for the cataloging and closure of the NRC's Request for Additional Information during the licensing of the US-APWR. Past responsibilities have included detailed review of drawings and specifications for inputs to room heat up and HELB calculations, detailed review of published component testing results for inputs into aging tests for equipment qualification, drafting of test procedures, preparing of calculations and reports, providing Quality Assurance support to the US-APWR Engineering Procurement drafting project, and providing support for the drafting and editing of EOPs and ERGs for the US-APWR.Hardware Design Engineer, 2008 to 2010 GE-Hitachi (GEH), Wilmington, NC Designed conceptual repair hardware for BWR nuclear reactors using Autodesk Inventor, created detailed part and assembly models and drawings for reference and for manufacturing, drafted installation and inspection specifications, worked closely with tooling and analysis groups to ensure feasibility of repair installation and compliance with NRC regulations, and provided engineering support during hardware installation during refueling outages. Duties also included participation in design challenges and reviews, peer review of engineering designs and documents, drafting of engineering procedures, and streamlining engineering processes.

Accomplishments include completion of Mechanical Design Fundamentals coursework, three accepted Intellectual Property submissions, a successfully employed time/cost savings method, and the successful installation of both first-of-a-kind hardware designs and several routine repair hardware designs.PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Member, American Nuclear Society (ANS), Michigan Chapter PUBLICATIONS AND PATENT APPLICATIONS Tsuruga Dryer Repair/Mitigation Method Concepts, GEHI-0000-0 109-7593 (GEH Proprietary Document)Duane Arnold Feedwater Sparger Cold Spring Restoration Repair, Technical Safety Evaluation Report, Page of 2 r TETRATECH 8/22/2012 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 7 of 20 Norbert Wroblewski Engineer Level II GEHI-0000-0086-0575 (GEH Proprietary Document)KKM Summary Description of the Shroud Head and Separator Modifications, GEHI-0000-0104-7027 (GEH Proprietary Document)US Patent Application No. 20100246744

-Apparatus

& System for Dampening the Vibration Experienced by an Object US Patent Application No. 20110135049

-Apparatus

& System for Restricting the Movement of a Component USPTO no. 12/850218

-Method and Apparatus for a BWR Jet Pump Support System Page 2 of 2 8/22/2012 N TETRATECH Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 8 of 20 Brian J. Zapata, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.Project Manager Education The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Ph.D., Infrastructure and Environmental Systems, May 2012 Dissertation: "Full-Scale Testing and Numerical Modeling of a Multistory Masonry Structure Subjected to Internal Blast Loading" M.S. Civil Engineering, 2007 B.S., Civil Engineering, 2003 Area of Concentration:

Structural Engineering Licensures Professional Engineer -North Carolina, South Carolina, New York Structural Engineer -Hawaii Professional Experience Dr. Zapata has nine years of professional experience in structural, blast, and forensic engineering.

He currently serves as a Project Manager responsible for overseeing various structural and forensic projects for government and private sector clients. He has experience in the analysis, design, and renovation of commercial and industrial structures, including office buildings, warehouse and distribution centers, manufacturing facilities, fossil power facilities, and nuclear power facilities.

His experience encompasses the major structural foundation and framing systems including reinforced concrete, structural steel, masonry, and timber. In addition, Dr. Zapata possesses expertise in the design of blast resistant structures and structural dynamics, performing design work for private and public sector projects.

Dr. Zapata also has experience in explosives and blast testing, finite element analysis, materials investigations, building condition surveys, nondestructive testing, and structural instrumentation.

Project Experience Lead Structural Engineer.

Containment Restoration Proposal Assessment.

Crystal River Unit 3, Crystal River, Florida. Dr. Zapata coordinated a diverse team of specialists including structural engineers, finite element modelers, and construction industry experts. Provided direction on project tasks, conducted site visits to CR3, coordinated the technical component of the assessment effort and wrote and assembled an interim and final report. Delivered project on a very aggressive schedule.

Provided critical analysis on a first of a kind project. (2012)Project Manager. Stacking Tower Lift, Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek. NC.Dr. Zapata performed the engineering design necessary to lift the Belews Creek Steam Station radial stacking tower off of its foundations.

This permitted the center pivot and powered trucks to be replaced.

Work included a condition assessment, repair recommendations, and modifications to the structure to permit the 125 ton lift. (2012)Proiect Manager. Crane Upratina Analysis.

Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek.NC. Dr. Zapata performed a structural analysis to confirm the capacity of the overhead crane in the Crusher House. Engineering included a structural model of the runway beams and supporting structure and recommendations on retrofits to increase the structure's capacity.(2012)

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 9 of 20 Project Mananer. FGD Primary Classifier Overflow Tank Personnel Platforms.

Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek, NC. Dr. Zapata designed new steel framing to support personnel platforms over the FGD Primary Classifier Overflow Tanks for Belews Creek Units #1 and #2. (2012)Project Mananer. UNC System Campuses Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning.

UNCC.Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata provided consulting services on subcontract to UNCC as part of a pre-disaster mitigation planning program for the UNC University System under contract from FEMA. Dr. Zapata directed development of screening tools and methodologies to rank the vulnerability of University assets to damage from natural disasters.

Using the prioritized facilities lists, Dr. Zapata performed on-site surveys at every UNC System campus to identify specific vulnerabilities and make recommendations for mitigating actions. (2008-2011)

Project Engineer.

Physical Security Analysis.

New Bank of America Office Tower.Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a nonlinear progressive collapse analysis according to established Unified Facility Criteria guidance.

Dr. Zapata also designed blast resistant walls and appurtenances for the facility's mailroom.

The project was able to provide the client with a realistic assessment of the progressive collapse resistance of the proposed structure.

Test Director.

RFID as Explosive Triggering Mechanism, Charlotte.

NC. Dr. Zapata designed and coordinated a full scale demonstration of the fact that active RFID equipment can be used to trigger explosive devices. Dr. Zapata oversaw construction of the prototype triggering device, supervised the setup of the field test, and provided photography, video, and documentation of the test for the client.Project Engineer.

Trichloroethylene Forensic Investigation.

Tinker AFB. OK. Dr. Zapata assisted in developing and calibrating a groundwater model to analyze subsurface transport of chlorinated solvents at an active Air Force base. As part of the work, Dr. Zapata wrote software to externally couple PEST and FEFLOW to permit the estimation of in situ conductivities.

Dr.Zapata also wrote software to analyze well pump test data to estimate soil conductivity experimentally.

(2009)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Concrete Tunnel. Buck Steam Station. Rowan County, NC.Dr. Zapata performed calculations to determine if an existing reinforced concrete reclaim tunnel could accommodate an opening for a new feeder system. (2009)Project En2ineer.

Desi2n of Reclaim Tunnel System, Tyrell. NC. Dr. Zapata assisted in the design of a new reclaim tunnel system for Duke Energy's Marshall Steam Station. The project required design of new concrete structures and the structural retrofit of an existing concrete structure to accommodate conveyor system openings.

The project also included numerous steel platforms supporting vibrating machinery.

(2009)Project Manager. Errazuriz Landfill Gas Flare. United Nations. Santiago.

Chile. Dr.Zapata managed a project based out of ZAPATA's Santiago office in which a small landfill gas flare was installed at a Santiago landfill.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Parking Garage Evaluations.

CB Richard Ellis. Dallas. TX. Dr. Zapata assisted in performing visual condition assessments of two existing, multistory parking structures, and provided recommendations for repairs. (2008)

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 10 of 20 Project Engineer.

Roof Loading Analysis, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of an existing floor system at an industrial facility.

The on-site survey and analysis identified numerous flaws in the construction and design of the flooring system. (2008)Proiect Engineer.

Feasibility of Bulldozer Impact Protection System, Marshall Steam Station, Terrell NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the feasibility of adding a concrete encasement to the existing stacking towers at Marshall Steam Station. The stacking towers were subject to impact by bulldozer and required protection.

The analysis was performed to verify the structural capacity of the existing stacking tower system to support the added loads of a concrete encasement.

The project required extensive finite element modeling using 2D and 3D elements to determine structural capacity.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Highly Deformed Corrugated Metal Pipe Tunnel, Marshall Steam Station, Terrell NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the capacity of a highly deformed corrugated metal pipe tunnel. The calculations were used to determine permissible loads on the ground surface and determine the factor of safety. In addition, Dr. Zapata conducted regular measurements of the deformation to identify any temporal trends in an effort to identify the potential for collapse.

(2008)Proiect Engineer.

CPCC Facade Upgrade. Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of the existing student and faculty parking decks to determine if they could sustain the load of new cladding.

Dr. Zapata also designed a footing for the new stairwell tower and performed finite element soil structure interaction modeling to determine tower deflection under wind and seismic events. (2008)Progect Engineer.

Spreader Beam Matrix Evaluation, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of the existing spreader beam matrix in Bank of America Corporate Center's chiller plant. Dr. Zapata developed drawings showing the existing beam layout, identified the capacity of the system as it exists, and designed an expansion for the spreader beam matrix to permit lifting heavy chiller motors. (2008)Proiect Engineer.

Parking Deck Collapse, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata assisted in the design of temporary structural shoring for recovery operations at the collapse site. Dr. Zapata provided on-site supervision of the rigging and crane crew to prevent further structural damage and to provide documentation of forensic evidence.

Dr. Zapata performed analyses and was able to identify the cause of the collapse.

These findings were documented in a written report submitted to the County as a requirement for reconstruction of the structure.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Charleston Square Apartments, Auburn AL. Dr. Zapata performed design calculations for multiple four story timber framed apartment buildings and designed the lateral force resisting system. The project required close coordination with the architect as the architectural design of the structure was being updated concurrently with the structural design process. (2008)Proiect Engineer.

Analysis of Overtime HVAC Costs, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata performed an analysis of the water cooled chiller system at One Independence Center to develop an hourly cost for billing tenants requesting overtime HVAC. Dr. Zapata also assisted in identifying and troubleshooting errors in the facility's BTU metering system. The project resulted in considerable savings for the property owner and accurate billing for the tenant. (2008)Proiect Engineer.

Parking Garage Evaluation and Repairs, Bank of America Plaza, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a structural evaluation of an existing multi-story parking Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 1I of 20 garage, and provided recommendations for repairs. Dr. Zapata also provided field supervision of the structural repairs while coordinating and maintaining garage operations.

(2007)Project Engineer.

Physical Security Analysis.

New Bank of America Office Tower, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a nonlinear progressive collapse analysis according to established Unified Facility Criteria guidance.

Dr. Zapata also designed blast resistant walls and appurtenances for the facility's mailroom.

The project was able to provide the client with a realistic assessment of the progressive collapse resistance of the proposed structure.

(2007)Proiect Engineer.

Analysis of Concrete Plate Floor Capacity, Charlotte.

NC. Dr. Zapata performed an analysis of the concrete flat plate floor system at a Bellsouth communication center in preparation for increased loading from high capacity batteries.

(2007)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Soil Vapor Migration.

Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata programmed a one dimensional finite element program to analyze transient soil vapor migration.

The model included the novel feature of barometric pumping to model the enhanced surface fluxes created by changes in barometric pressure.

(2006)Project En2ineer.

ITC Garage Wind Panels, Charlotte, NC. Trammell Crow. Dr. Zapata performed finite element modeling of connections to support a large decorative wind panel system to cover the east facade of the International Trade Center parking garage. (2005)Proiect Engineer.

Building Settlement Investigation and Repairs, Matthews, NC.Presbyterian Hospital Matthews.

Dr. Zapata designed and installed a data acquisition system to monitor basement walls for excessive movement under the force of pressure grouting on the soil side of the basement wall. (2001)Research Experience Blast Testing for Code Calibration.

UNC Charlotte.

Dr. Zapata performed data acquisition, data analysis, and hydrocode modeling for a project designed to study the performance of several high explosive compounds.

The project required over six days of blast testing in the field during which overpressure measurements were made for several types of high explosive.

These pressure measurements were then used to calibrate airblast models for use in experiment design.Evaluation of NCDOT Bridge Analysis Procedure.

The project was designed to evaluate current NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) bridge load rating procedures.

This project included the in-situ load testing of seven bridges in Charlotte, NC, including the first composite bridge deck in the Carolinas.

Dr. Zapata designed the sensor configuration, assisted in installing sensors, and programmed the data acquisition system.Dynamic Behavior of Curtain Walls. The project was designed to study the low amplitude dynamic behavior of glass curtain walls. Information gathered during the project was later used to validate a finite element model. Dr. Zapata installed dynamic sensors, programmed the data acquisition system, and performed data analysis.Strengthening of Masonry Shear Walls. The project was designed to investigate the possibility of using fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) systems to increase the capacity of masonry shear walls in low rise buildings.

The experiments yielded several commercially feasible methods which significantly enhanced shear capacity.

The results of this test helped secure funding from the National Science Foundation to perform full scale tests of the retrofit methods.The full scale tests were performed on one-story structures built in the lab and retrofitted with Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment F Page 12 of 20 FRP. The full scale testing validated the results obtained on component level tests. Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, specified instrumentation, and programmed the data acquisition system.Ouasi-static Load Testing of Curtain Walls. This project tested full-scale curtain wall systems to failure. The information has been used to generate resistance functions which will be employed in future non-linear analyses.

Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, installed sensors, and programmed the data acquisition system. Dr. Zapata also compared the static elastic deflection of the curtain walls to a finite element model developed for his master's project.Structural Properties of Prefabricated Structural Panels. This project was designed to quantify the shear, flexural, and axial capacity of prefabricated structural panels. Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, installed instrumentation, and programmed the data acquisition system.Strengthening of Spandrel Beams in Torsion. The project was designed to study the optimal method for wrapping reinforced concrete spandrel beams with fiber reinforced polymers (FRP)to enhance torsional capacity.

Dr. Zapata assisted in construction of specimens, installation of FRP, and installation of strain gages.Shear Strengthening of Existing Beams in a Hospital.

This project validated a retrofit technique for enhancing the shear capacity of concrete beams in an existing hospital.

Dr. Zapata installed instrumentation and programmed the data acquisition system.Evaluation of Steel Tension Connection for Power Plant. This project validated a tension connection designed beyond the limits of traditional AISC guidance for use in a power plant. Dr.Zapata installed instrumentation and programmed the data acquisition system.Dissertation Research University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Graduate Student, 2003-2005 This National Science Foundation funded project studied both the blast loading and the dynamic response of a coal fired power plant subjected to blast loads. The experimental program included the detonation of three explosive devices inside the boiler house prior to its demolition.

The structure was instrumented with pressure transducers, accelerometers, and strain gages. A variety of analytical methods were tested to compare analytical predictions of deflection and blast pressures to those measured during the experiments.

Masters Degree Research University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Graduate Student, 2003-2005 Participated in project designed to study the dynamic behavior of curtain wall systems subjected to low-level transient loads. Built linear elastic finite element model using ANSYS and calibrated the model using experimental data. The software accurately modeled the curtain wall system and is currently being used to study curtain wall systems subjected to low-level blast loads.Internships Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM Internship, 2006 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 13 of 20 Worked as an intern at Sandia National Laboratories for the Thermal and Reactive Processes Group. Performed CTH simulations of airblasts producing comparisons of CTH to empirical airblast data for a variety of charge sizes and standoffs.

Performed calculations to determine if CTH JWL equation of state parameters were self consistent with regard to energy and CJ state parameters.

PUBLICATIONS Weggel, David C., Brian J. Zapata, and Michael J. Kiefer. "Properties and Dynamic Behavior of Glass Curtain Walls with Split Screw Spline Mullions." Journal of Structural Engineering Vol.133, No 10, 2007.Weggel, David C. and Brian J. Zapata. "Laminated Glass Curtain Walls and Laminated Glass Lites Subjected to Low-Level Blast Loading." Journal of Structural Engineering Vol. 134, No. 3, 2008.Zapata, Brian J. and David C. Weggel. "Blast Resistant Curtain Wall Subjected to Low-Level Blast Loading." Proceedings of the 25th International Modal Analysis Conference.

February 19-22, 2007 Orlando, Florida.Zapata, Brian J. and David C. Weggel. "Collapse Study of an Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Building Subjected to Internal Blast Loading." Journal of the Performance of Constructed Facilities Vol. 22, No. 2, 2008.Zapata, B.J. and D.C. Weggel. "Computational Airblast Modeling of Commercial Explosives." Tenth International Conference on Structures Under Shock and Impact. May 14-16, 2008, Algarve, Portugal.SKILLS Computer:

CTH, ANSYS, LSDYNA, PLAXIS, Matlab, Maple, MathCAD, AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Adobe Photoshop, Visio, UNIX/Linux/Windows, HP VEE, BenchLink Data Logger, SAP 2000, RISA General: Structural Design, Finite Element Analysis, Experiment Design, High Speed Data Acquisition, Structural Dynamics, Data Analysis, Explosives Engineerin9 Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 14 of 20 Clinton D. Robertson, P.E., LEED AP Project Manager Education The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, TN BSE, Structural Engineering, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, May 1994 Special Training Building Codes in North Carolina, Lorman Education Services, 2006 LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations V2.2, Technical Review Workshop Charlotte

-Mecklenburg Certified Site Inspector Training Course Forensic Engineering, Professional Development Program, UNC Charlotte OSHA 10-Hour Construction Industry Safety & Health Licensure Professional Engineer, 2006, North Carolina, No. 032084 Professional Engineer, 2006, South Carolina, No. 25410 Professional Engineer, 2007, Tennessee, No. 109013 Professional Engineer, 2008, Virginia, No. 044180 Professional Engineer, 2011, Georgia, No. 036436 Professional Engineer, 2011, Florida, No. 73531 Professional Engineer, 2012, Kentucky, No. 28840 Professional Affiliations and Honors American Society of Civil Engineers, 2004 -Present Structural Engineers Association of North Carolina, 2009 Treasurer, 2010 & 2011 President Professional Experience Mr. Robertson has more than nine years of professional experience in civil, structural and forensic engineering.

He also has over eight years of team and project management experience.

He currently serves as a Structural Engineer responsible for overseeing various structural and forensic projects for government and private sector clients. He has extensive experience in the design and renovation of commercial, residential, and industrial structures, including hotels, multi-story residential buildings, office buildings, hospitals, gymnasiums, warehouse and distribution centers and manufacturing facilities.

His experience encompasses the major structural foundation and framing systems including reinforced concrete, structural steel, masonry, and timber. In addition to his structural design experience, Mr. Robertson has experience in civil site design, including grading and erosion control plans, sewer and storm water design, plumbing, and mechanical and electrical design for small commercial construction.

Project Experience Structural Engineer.

Marshall Steam Station Reclaim Tunnel, Terrell, NC. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. (Prolect #1232). Mr. Robertson performed the structural design for the analysis and design of a new reclaim tunnel to replace tunnel #1 with cast-in-place concrete coal vaults and precast concrete tunnels on concrete auger piles and grade beams. The structural design of the coal vaults and conveyor tunnels required the analysis of coal piles and D II bulldozer surcharge loads. Mr. Robertson also reviewed and oversaw the production of Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 15 of 20 construction drawings and specifications, reviewed construction submittals, responded to requests for information and provided other construction administration support. Mr. Robertson managed two team members for the project.Structural Engineer.

FORSCOM HO Review. Fort Bragg, NC. Fort Bragg. DPW.(Prolect #1273). Mr. Robertson performed the review of the structural engineering design of the new Combined FORSCOM/USARC Headquarters at Fort Bragg consisting of a 483,000 sf Headquarters building, a 53,000 sf Server Farm, 9,500 sf of IT services and control areas, and a 27,500 sf Disaster Recovery Center. The review included checks of plans, specifications, and structural calculations.

Regular responses to design submittals were submitted in a timely manner. ZAPATA was the quality assurance team for the end client.Structural Engineer.

FORSCOMIUSARC Annex at the Old Bowley School, Fort Bragg, NC. Fort Bragg. DPW. (Prolect #1291). Mr. Robertson provided structural design and analysis to support the renovation of the nine-building 54,000 sf Old Bowley School facility that converted classroom spaces into cubicle workspaces.

Mr. Robertson provided structural support for the renovation of common space into conference rooms (one SIPR), training rooms, storage space and a large auditorium.

The project is LEED-Silver.

Mr. Robertson managed one team member for the project.Structural Engineer.

JSOMTC Medical Training Building.

Fort Bragg. NC. DPW.(Project #1342). Mr. Robertson provided structural design for the design and construction of a new training facility at Fort Bragg, by providing the design team with the design of the foundation for the pre-engineered metal building, as well as supervised and reviewed the construction drawings.

Specifications were produced that provided guidelines for the biding and construction of the building's structural systems. Direct coordination with users, as well as review meetings, were conducted to maintain the interface with the client. Review meetings were held at kick-off, 65% and 95% with stakeholders from the Post, including DWQ, Environmental and DPW. To ensure quality all deliverables were peer reviewed and then reviewed by management and senior management in accordance with engineering division protocols.

The project site is located in a high security area. This resulted in several constraints on location and placement of the structure.

The structure was ultimately located so that is was further constrained by existing utilities, facility drainage ditch and the fence line. By working with the end user we were able to satisfactorily accommodate these challenges.

Mr. Robertson managed one team member for this project. (12/2009 -6/2010)Structural Engineer.

EPRI Test Stand Evaluations.

EPRI. (Project #1296). Mr. Robertson led a team of structural engineers and technicians to assess the steel structural support stands that support heavy steel test samples. Each support stand had to be measured, dimensioned and drawn in CAD software.

The type of steel the stands were constructed of had to be determined.

An assessment of the support capacity of the stand was then determined.

The final deliverable was CAD drawings of the stand and a load capacity certification for each stand. Initial meeting and final reports on each test stand were provided.

Mr. Robertson managed two team members for this project. (2009)Structural Engineer/Project Mana2er. Georgia Pacific -Rock Hill. Sterling and Athens.Georida Pacific. (Proiect #1238). Mr. Robertson performed site visits and visual assessment of the wood treatment drip pads of the plants located in Rock Hill, SC, Sterling, GA and Athens, AL. The assessment was to determine if the wood treatment facilities drip pads met the EPA regulations 40 CFR 265. Mr. Robertson assessed the entire slab taking photographs and notes for each of the three facilities.

He produced a report outlining the repairs to be made and methods of performance as well as suggested maintenance requirements for each of the facilities Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 16 of 20 to remain in compliance with EPA requirements.

Meetings were held with Plant Managers at each site visit and a final report with recommendations for repair and maintenance was provided.Ensured quality by providing sufficient time to assess facility and sending all reports to management for review and edit before sending to client. Mr. Robertson managed one team member for this project. (2008 -2012)Project Mana2er/Structural Engineer.

Hefner VAMC Bld2. 42 LTC and Hospice, Salisbury, NC (1341). RPA Desi2n. Mr. Robertson performed the project management and structural design for a 12 bed hospice addition to the Long Term Care building.

The addition is a separate single story cold-formed steel framed building with separate entrance.

In addition to the Hospice building, Mr. Robertson also provided consulting services to the renovation of areas in the main Long Term Care building including the conversion of patient rooms into a Hotel and the removal of steel members in the atrium area to open it up and make it more aesthetically pleasing.

Mr. Robertson managed an associate engineer and drafting technician to complete the structural design and contract documents ahead of schedule.

He attended planning meetings with the architect and client, as well as weekly conference calls, periodic coordination meetings and email and phone calls as necessary.

The project was designed to meet local building codes although it is a Government/VA project. To ensure quality internal review of engineering design and construction documents was performed by the Engineering Manager. (August 2009 -March 2010)Project Manager. Structural Engineer.

Department of Veterans Affairs. Consolidated Patient Account Center; 2500 S Lakemont Ave. Orlando, FL; Structural Services (Project#1328). Mr. Robertson performed the structural engineering design and oversaw the production of construction documents for the addition of a three story elevator tower addition to the existing precast concrete moment frame building.

Mr. Robertson also provided structural guidance and consultation to the renovation of the third floor of the existing precast concrete framed facility.Determination of the building structural systems was critical in providing advice to the design team on what could and could not be demolished.

The structural system was a composite construction of precast pre-stressed concrete beams and joists and poured-in-place concrete columns, slabs, and beams. This was determined by reviewing the existing structural drawings and by visually inspecting the structure.

Mr. Robertson managed two team members for the project. Coordination with the client included conference calls with the design team held every other week; and meetings with the design architects were conducted as needed. To ensure quality, the structural design was reviewed at every stage by the engineer of record. (2009)Structural Engineer.

Birkdale Villa2e Parking Deck Assessments; Huntersville.

NC.Developers Diversified Realty (Project #1288). Mr. Robertson performed the structural condition assessment of four two-story precast concrete parking decks at Birkdale Village in Huntersville, NC. The assessment included extensive site observations and photographic documentation.

A final report was provided for each parking structure categorizing the structural distresses as needing immediate, near future, or planned maintenance repairs. Mr. Robertson was responsible for managing CAB of the Carolinas, concrete repair subcontractors.

Client interface included keeping the property manager informed on progress of project on a regular basis. All site visits were required to be performed during non-peak hours. (09/2008 -06/2009)Structural Engineer.

MOB Support Facility -Fort Gordon, GA. CDA Architects (Project#1273). Mr. Robertson performed structural design and analysis for a truck load-out mobilization unit at Fort Gordon, GA, producing foundation design and permit drawings.

The project included a three-bay enclosed pallet and load-out building with offices, a new roadway, parking, and storage. The project re-used existing scales with upgraded monitoring and controls.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 17 of 20 The project was designed for and achieved LEED Silver accreditation.

Mr. Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

(2008)Structural Engineer.

UNC System Campuses FEMA Inspection, UNC Charlotte (Prooect#1243). Mr. Robertson provided consulting services on subcontract to UNCC as part of a pre-disaster mitigation planning program for the UNC System under contract from FEMA. Using a prioritized facilities list, Mr. Robertson performed on-site surveys at every UNC System campus to identify specific vulnerabilities and make recommendations for mitigating actions. Client interface included coordination of on-site inspection and attending review meetings to coordinate results. Mr. Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

(2008)Structural Engineer.

Forensic Analysis and Remedial Design Following Partial Collapse of Parking Deck, Charlotte, NC (Project #1265). CB Richard Ellis. Mr. Robertson assisted in the forensic investigation and remedial design including the emergency response to the failure, emergency shoring design, assessment of the failure mechanism, and photographic documentation.

The analysis included laboratory support for the metallurgical analysis and a weld inspection by certified welding inspectors.

Mr. Robertson worked with precast/pre-stressed concrete contractors to provide a remedial design that corrected the failure mechanism and resolved other potential failure locations, proactive repairs, and general maintenance.

Mr.Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

Regular site visits were required during construction to meet with the owner to discuss plans to repair the failure and provide responses.

to owner and contractor questions.

Regular period reports of site visits were provided to the general contractor and owner's representative.

A final report documenting the failure and the repairs was provided to the owner. (03/2008 -09/2008)Structural Engineer/Project Manager. Structural Design of Charleston Place Apartments, Auburn, AL. The Charleston Place student apartment project in Auburn, AL, included structural engineering for 11 buildings of two to four story structures with over 250,000 square feet of living space and an estimated construction cost of $14,000,000.

The wood framed structures used a combination of wood panel shear walls and steel framing. Mr. Robertson led a team of engineers, designers and drafters to produce the complex structural design ahead of schedule.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis of Roof Structure.

Triad Center, Greensboro, NC. New condensing units were scheduled to be installed on the roof of the Triad Center in Greensboro, NC. Mr. Robertson was commissioned to analyze the roof structure of the existing building and determine if it can carry the additional load of the condensing units. A report was prepared with Mr. Robertson's professional opinion regarding the addition of new condensing units. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Assessment of Five Story Precast Parking Deck, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural assessment of a five story precast parking deck located in Charlotte, NC. A report was written that documented all visual distresses in the concrete slab, precast concrete members and bolted and welded connections.

The report provided the owner with a tool to classify the distress as needing immediate repair, near future repair or general maintenance repair. (2008)Structural Engineer, Preliminary Structural Design of Proposed Five Story Parking Deck, Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a preliminary structural design of a proposed five story precast concrete parking deck for Central Piedmont Community College. The preliminary design assessed the loads on the structure and Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 18 of 20 the bearing loads of the proposed columns in order to assess the soil stress and bearing capacity.(2008)Structural Engineer, 4th Story Apartment Balcony Structural Assessment, Charlotte, NC.Mr. Robertson's expansive wood construction experience made him the perfect candidate to evaluate the structural failure of the 4th story balcony at an apartment complex in Charlotte, NC.It was determined that water intrusion had caused structural failure of the engineer lumber supporting the balcony. Mr. Robertson provided the owner witha solution to repair the structural failure along with a complete assessment report. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Design of Precast Stair Addition to Existing Parking Deck, Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed structural design of an addition of two precast stairs to a five level parking garage. The design accounted for wind and seismic loads. The foundation was designed to prevent overturning do to wind and/or seismic loads. The construction drawings were provided to the client for permit. (2008)Structural Engineer, Intake Bridge Evaluation, Chester Metropolitan District, Fort Lawn, SC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of engineers to perform an assessment of the Intake Bridge at the clean water filter plant for the Chester Metropolitan District at Fort Lawn, SC. The project involved a visual assessment of the prestressed double tee concrete bridge and steel bents. A report describing the observations, the assessment, and the allowable load rating for the bridge was provided.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis and Design of Sluice Gate Installation.

Chester Metropolitan District.

Fort Lawn, SC. Mr. Robertson performed structural analysis and design of a new sluice gate to be installed in the clean water filter plant for the Chester Metropolitan District at Fort Lawn, SC. The project involved strength analysis of the concrete flume, location of reinforcing steel using a pacometer in the top of the flume to be cut, the design of the sluice gate and field observations of the concrete cutting process. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis of Plaster Cornice at Historic 16 S. Broad St..Charleston, SC. Mr. Robertson performed a site structural analysis and intrusive investigation the of the historic plaster cornice for the historic Wachovia Bank building in Charleston, SC.Mr. Robertson prepared a report describing the condition of the plaster cornice and required remedial action to preserve the historic plaster cornice. Mr. Robertson designed a repair and provided details to secure the cornice and prevent future damage by high winds or earthquake.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis for 5th Street Jack and Bore Project, Bank of America Building, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed structural analysis for the jack and bore project to connect the new Bank of America building with the International Trade Center in downtown Charlotte, NC. The project consisted of analyzing the effect of boring into the basement wall of the ITC building and designing a securing solution to bore through the shoring of the building being constructed.

Mr. Robertson provide design details for boring through the shoring and the foundation wall of the ITC for use in the project drawings for the jack and bore. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis of Spreader Beam Matrix, Bank of America Corporate Center, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson was part of the team that performed structural analysis of a spreader beam matrix designed to carry the load of the chiller units for the Bank of America Corporate Center mechanical systems. The beams were analyzed to determine if they could carry the additional load of the new up-sized chiller units. The beams were Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 19 of 20 required to carry the load of the motors while maintenance was performed.

A report with recommendations for revisions to the spreader beam matrix was provided to the client. (2008)Structural Engineer/Prooect Manager, Renovate Four Company Operations Buildings.

Fort Bragg, NC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of design professional consisting of architects, and civil, mechanical and electrical engineers to renovate four buildings originally constructed in 1999 for use as a storage facility.

The expected use of the facility after renovation was a company operations facility for the Airborne 525th Battlefield Surveillance Brigade. The second floor of the four buildings was transformed from open storage to assembly and office space. The design team provided plans for renovation on an accelerated deliverable schedule that reduced the design time by 40%. (2008)Structural Engineer.

Structural Evaluation of Building Facade, Wachovia Building.Columbia.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural condition survey of a cracked precast concrete fagade panel. The evaluation included an external and intrusive visual structural examination.

Mr. Robertson oversaw and assisted in the removal and replacement of the interior finished in order to determine the cause of the fagade distress.

Mr. Robertson provided a report that included possible cause and recommendations for structural remediation.

Mr. Robertson oversaw the repair construction of the distressed fagade panel. (2008)Structural Engineer/Prolect Manager. Renovate 1935 Building for TV/Audio/Photography Studio, Fort Bragg, NC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of design professionals consisting of architects, and civil, mechanical and electrical engineers to renovate a historic 1935 military facility.

The original use of the facility was a "Mule Barn." The expected use of the facility after renovation was a high-tech TV/Audio/Photography studio for use by the Directorate of Information Management.

The design had to consider budget, technology, use, and historical significance.

The team provided plans for renovation on schedule that were sensitive to need, budget, and historic relevance.

(2008)Structural Engineer/Project Manager. Bank of America Corporate Center and Founders Hall Fall Protection for Window Washers and Exterior Building Maintenance Evaluation.

Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson headed up a team that evaluated the existing conditions of fall protection devices and equipment, compared it with current codes, regulations and standards, and provided CAD drawings documenting current conditions.

A thorough report including recommendation for compliance with current codes, regulations, and standards was provided to the client. (2007)Structural Engineer.

Structural Evaluation of 206 S. Church Street Parking Garage.Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural condition survey of a steel framed parking garage. The evaluation included a visual structural examination and revealed several deficiencies requiring remedial action. Mr. Robertson oversaw mapping of the distresses in CAD format for a report that including recommendations for structural remediation provided to the client. (2007)Structural Engineer/Proiect Manager, Residential Structural Design of Cedar Gables II -Duplex. Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed the structural design of the 2,800 sf duplex and oversaw production of the construction documents.

(2007)Structural Engineer.

Structural Evaluation for Installation of New 2MW Generator.

Gateway Village, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed a Structural Evaluation of the roof framing below the proposed location for the new 2 MW generator planned for installation on the Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment F Page 20 of 20 roof of the GWV 800 building.

Mr. Robertson also oversaw non-destructive testing, x-raying and pacometer testing of concrete floor and roof piers. (2007)Structural Engineer, Independence Parking Deck Structural Condition Assessment.

Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed a thorough structural condition survey of a precast concrete parking garage. The evaluation included a visual structural examination and revealed several deficiencies and construction defects requiring remedial action. A comprehensive report including recommendations for remediation was provided to the client. (2007)Structural Engineer.

Structural Assessment of Bank of America Plaza Parking Garage, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed field observations of structural defects and/or defects and provided an opinion regarding required repairs. Mr. Robertson also assisted in the oversight of the repair construction.

(2007)Structural Engineer, Structural Evaluation of Floor Capacity, BellSouth, Caldwell St., Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson examined existing drawings and performed a structural evaluation using ADAPT-RC v5.00, of the 3rd floor of the BellSouth building on Caldwell St. in Charlotte, NC. The original structure was built in 1928 and added on to in 1953. An analysis of building codes for the construction years was required.

(2007)Proiect Mana2er/Structural Engineer.

Mayfair Townhomes Poured in Place Concrete Retaining Wall, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson engineered and managed the design of a 13'maximum height, 650' long poured-in-place concrete retaining wall. Unique soil conditions required the use of micro piles in specific locations.

The wall retained a pond and roads. (2007)Structural Engineer, South Point Baptist Church Family Ministrv Center, Belmont, NC.Mr. Robertson engineered the structural systems and supervised the preparation of the structural drawings for a new multi-use facility.

The 17,740 sf masonry building had eave heights of 25'3".(2007)SKILLS Computer:

AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Adobe Photoshop, RISA ZACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment G SWEL Peer Review Checklist Attachment G, Page 1 of 3 Revision 0 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment G Page 2 of 3 Instructions for Completing Checklist This peer review checklist may be used to document the review of the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL) in accordance with Section 6: Peer Review. The space below each question should be used to describe any findings identified during the peer review process and how the SWEL may be changed to address those findings.

Additional Space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.1. Were the Five Safety Functions adequately represented in the SWEL 1 Selection?

Y 0 N El Each safety function (reactor reactivity control, reactor coolant pressure control, reactor coolant inventory control, decay heat removal, containment function) is represented by at least 45 items on the list. The list includes 42 items that fall into all 5 safety function categories.

2. Does SWEL 1 include an appropriate representation of items having the following sample selection attributes:

a. Various Types of Systems? Y V N EI Of the 27 different systems, 13 are represented by just 1 or 2 items in the list. Initially this was a concern, however, even 1 or 2 samples are enough to represent at least 10% of the available equipment for these systems. Therefore, it is believed that each system is adequately represented in the list.b. Major new and replacement equipment?

Y 0 N El Seven (7) of the approximately 100 items on the walk-down list are new or replacement equipment.

It is believed that older equipment is more likely to be found with degraded or insufficient anchorage, and therefore it is appropriate for the majority of the SWEL list to be comprised of older equipment.

c. Various Types of Equipment?

Y M N El Of the 22 different classes of equipment, all are represented by at least 1 item. Of those 22 classes, 11 are represented by 1 or 2 items but this sample size represents at least 10% of the available equipment for these classes. Therefore, each equipment type is adequately represented in the list.d. Various Environments?

Y X N El During the development of the SSEL, components in 23 elevation

/ compartments were identified across 8 facilities (Control Building, Diesel Generator Building 1, Diesel Generator Building 2, Drywell, Intake Structure, Multi-purpose Facility, Reactor Building, and Yard) for potential walk-down.

Of those 23 compartments, all but one (Drywell, 972 elevation) has a component selected for walk-down.

Although drywell elevation 972' does not have a selected item for walk-down, 10 other drywell components are subject to walk-downs.

The various environments at CNS are adequately represented in the list.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment G Page 3 of 3 e. Equipment Enhanced based on the findings of IPEEE (or equivalent) program? Y N N 0 Twenty (20) of the approximately 100 components on the list have been previously included in the IPEEE program at CNS. Considering these items have been recently upgraded and are therefore more likely to be in acceptable condition, IPEEE enhanced equipment is adequately represented on the list.f. Were risk insights considered in the development of the SWEL 1? Y M N El Fifty four (54) of the approximately 100 components on the list are identified as Risk Significant.

Risk significance was determined using a combination of CNS PRA insights and IPEEE results.Given that over half of the components subject to walk-down fall in the risk significant category, appropriate risk insights were adequately considered during the development of the list.3. ForSWEL2 a. Were spent fuel pool related items considered, and if applicable included in SWEL 2? YN Noi Spent fuel pool related items were considered while generating the list. CNS and the walk-down team determined that some components could be potentially crucial for operation despite not being classified seismic class 1; these items were included on the list.b. Was an appropriate justification documented for spent fuel pool related items not included in SWEL 2? Y El N El Not Applicable

-Spent fuel pool related items were considered while generating the SWEL 2 list, as stated in 3.a.4. Provide any other comments related to the peer review of the SWELs Additional reviews of SWEL 1 were performed concurrently with the walk-downs of components and area walks-bys.

Very few components on the SWEL 1 list have been changed due to accessibility or schedule issues, but those that have been changed were reviewed and found acceptable.

5. Have all peer review comments been adequately addressed in the final SWEL? Y 9 N []Peer Reviewer #1: Norbert Wroblewski DATE: 10/26/12 Peer Reviewer #2: Greg Hostetter DATE: 10/26/12 SACHfAY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment H Request for Information (RFI 2892-001)Attachment H, Page 1 of 27 Revision 0 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment H Page 2 of 27 Zichey Nuclear, Inc.Request for Information ZNI Docwwent Type: QAPD ZACHIRY 14 Lords Hill Road Slonington, CT 00378 PH: 860-446-9725 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RF) No: 282-001 Projeot Tile: CNS BOB NT-F 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns Page 1 of I 12A-C2 Work 470000152 CAeent PO X R&Vj n.: inuaenmt No. 3)Dol RR Or%#nbbd 11113=012 Dao* Required:

11M15=2012 Dmsa Compiete:

n/ A ?-R OrFIginatedr.

J. McKmnny Phone No.: 860-406-3608 E-mail Address: mddnineygift zhi.com RFI Answered W. ..Mamrto U Phoeu L.: 40248255270 Addvess: -ihinir uixfcom Pat A -Infonuation Requested:

E-mall response Is acceptable:

N]CNS has requested ZNE assistance in writing the final BDB NTTF 2.3 Seismic Walkdown Report for their submittal to the NRC. Based on Section 8 of the NRC endorsed seismic walkdown guidance (EPRI Report 1025288), there is a required section for the report titled Peer Review'. CNS contracted this part of the project out to another company, Tetra-Tech.

Since ey will not be signing the ZNE safety-related final deliverable, Engineering Eveluation 12-El8, their input into this document must be obtained via the use of this RFI response as a Design InpuL Please provide the Tetra-Tech section of the report with your response to this RFI.Pat B -Comments I Assumptions Used to Proceed and Schedule Impact (If applicable):

Please expedite this RFI to support the completion of the final BDB report for NRC submittal by 11/27/12.Part C -Clentendor Response:$9 I ee~'i-i ~K(el/'ew'5 ec i'~c-v¶4q44 feepor t .'0V/2 for t N*fck ea, t17//z 0/1 -a N FORM IS COMPLETED FORWARD ORIGINAL TO TME 2A DEPARTMENT AND A COP tro THz ZNz PROJCT mAmAGER Foon: N4211F06 RevIhIwL 00-CO Oats: 11-16-11 Page 1 of I Forim: N4211F05 Reviskm OOM DOW. 11-16-11 PsgeI of 1 Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment H Page 3 of 27 Morris, Clinton M.From: Marotz, Mitchell M. <mmmarot@nppd.com>

Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 4:49 PM To: McKinney, James M.

Subject:

FW: Seismic Peer review Attachments:

Submittal Attachment

-Checklist for Peer Review of SSC Selection.pdf; Submittal Attachment

-Peer Review Team.pdf; Peer Review Submittal.docx Jim, That last email from Greg was taken out of context. Attached is the final Peer Review Section. Please include in the report. This should be the last section needed right?01"Aac"Hf.

d1Yatofta DED -Projects Engineer Cooper Nuclear Station Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 98, Brownville, NE 68321 Office 1: (402) 825-5270 Office 2: (402) 825-2527 Pager: (402) 977-1096 mmmarotcnppd.com From: Hostetter, Greg [mailto: Greg.Hostetter@tetratech.com]

Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 8:40 AM To: Marotz, Mitchell M.Cc: Wroblewski, Norbert

Subject:

Seismic Peer review Mitch, Although there is still one open item out there on the Seismic Walk-down Submittal Report (inclusion of Base List 1 & 2), I don't foresee this impacting any of our conclusions.

Based on the last draft of the submittal report, we are now ready to supply our peer review section (including attachments) for the submittal report.Once we have a chance to review the final changes to the submittal report we will be able to provide you with our full Peer Review Report which will provide a thorough discussion of the conclusions that we have provided for inclusion in the submittal report.GREG Greg M Hostetter, CAPM I Senior Engineering Consultant I Senior Project Manager Toll Free: 888.930.7500 I Main: 734.930.7500 I Fax: 734.327.7501 1 Cell: 248.629.0629 areq.hostetter~tetratech.com Tetra Tech, Inc.24 Frank Lloyd Wright Dr, Suite 1200, Lobby B I Ann Arbor, Ml 48105 www.TetraTechAdvent.com I www.tetratech.com PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information.

Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.1 Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 4 of 27 9.0 PEER REVIEW The approach for the peer review portion of the Near Term Task Force (NTTF)Recommendation

2.3 Seismic

Walk-downs was based on the guidance provided in EPRI TR-1025286 "Seismic Walk-down Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic".

The Peer Review Team was made up of 4 engineers with various backgrounds and expertise including; seismic, licensing

/regulatory, systems, and operations.

The Peer Review Team leadership is made up of one overall Peer Review Lead, as well as two subject matter leads (one for equipment and one for seismic).

The Peer Review Team included the following individuals (resumes attached): " Peer Review Lead -Greg Hostetter o Responsible for all peer review activities, including creation of the final peer review report." Equipment Lead -Norbert Wroblewski o Responsible for all the equipment review activities, including the review of the SWELs.* Seismic Lead -Brian Zapata o Responsible for all seismic review activities of the team, including items related to the walk-downs and walk-bys.* Seismic Engineer -Clinton Robertson o Participant in seismic activities and other peer review activities as needed.The selection of Structures, Systems and Components (SSCs) was peer reviewed by engineers knowledgeable in plant design, operations, documentation, and SSCs. The Peer Review Team worked with Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) staff to modify the initial Seismic Walk-down Equipment List (SWEL) list to ensure SWEL items selected for inspection represented a diverse sample of plant equipment required to perform the five safety functions (reactor reactivity control, reactor coolant pressure control, reactor coolant inventory control, decay heat removal, containment function).

The seismic walk-downs and area walk-bys were peer reviewed in accordance with the guidance by engineers familiar with the seismic design of equipment anchorage.

The peer review included the following activities:

• The Peer Review Team conducted a short interview with each Seismic Walkdown Engineer (SWE) in order to establish their credentials.

• The Peer Review Team reviewed over 10% of the walk-down packages, including the Screening Evaluation Worksheets (SEWS) worksheet, plant drawings, equipment data sheets, walk-down checklists, and walk-by checklists.

The approach to the licensing basis reviews included a review of the licensing basis evaluations developed, including basis for entering potentially adverse seismic conditions into the Corrective Action Program (CAP).

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment H Page 5 of 27 A review of the draft submittal report examined the content of the report based on the guidance.

In addition to the completeness (alignment with the guidance), the accuracy with the SWELs (as reviewed) and the reviewed walk-down and area walk-by packages was also confirmed.

9.1 PEER REVIEW OF SEISMIC WALKDOWN EQUIPMENT LIST DEVELOPMENT Based on the criteria set forth in Section 3, "Selection of SSCs", and Section 6, "Peer Review", of the guidance, the Peer Review Team concludes that the SSCs selected by CNS for walk-down satisfy the requirements of NTTF Recommendation 2.3. SWEL 1 demonstrated an adequate diversity in system types, both major new and replacement equipment, and diversity in types of equipment and environments.

Risk insights were adequately considered, and components identified in the IPEEE Program were also represented.

SWEL 2 adequately addressed spent fuel pool equipment per the guidance.9.2 PEER REVIEW OF SEISMIC WALK-DOWNS AND WALK-BYS Based on the criteria set forth in Section 2 "Personnel Qualifications", Section 4 "Seismic Walk-downs and Walk-bys", and Section 6 "Peer Review" of the guidance, the Peer Review Team concludes that the SWEs were qualified to perform the walk-downs

/walk-bys and that the walk-downs

/ walk-bys were performed in accordance with the guidance.

The packages taken into the field were developed to a significant level of detail, based on the information available, to support inspections in the field. Although not all packages were fully complete to a level that captured what the peer reviewers would expect based on the items being inspected, there was still sufficient detail provided to conclude that an adequate review of all available equipment appears to have been completed.

9.3 PEER REVIEW OF LICENSING BASIS EVALUATIONS Based on the criteria set forth in Section 5, "Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluations", and Section 6, "Peer Review" of the guidance, the Peer Review Team concludes that CNS has met all requirements regarding Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluations.

The Corrective Actions generated by the walk-downs and walk-bys recognize insufficient anchorages, potential damage due to proximity during seismic events, degraded conditions and general seismic housekeeping issues, and their proposed resolutions deal with each type of found condition accordingly.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 6 of 27 9.4 PEER REVIEW OF SUBMITTAL REPORT Based on the criteria set forth in Section 8, "Submittal Report", Appendix H,"Documentation Requirements in 50.54(f) Letter", and Section 6, "Peer Review" of the guidance, the Peer Review Team concludes that CNS has met the requirements regarding the Submittal Report. The submittal report covers in detail the seismic licensing basis, the personnel qualifications, the selection of SSCs, the seismic walk-downs and walk-bys, the licensing basis evaluations, the IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report, and this peer review.ATTACHMENTS

-Peer Review Team Resumes-Checklist for Peer Review of SSC Selection Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment H Page 7 of 27 EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

Mr. Hostetter has over ten years of nuclear industry, research and related experience.

His areas of expertise include regulatory compliance support, environmental qualification (EQ) and aging management, Appendix R fire protection, thermal hydraulic analysis, room heat-up calculations, computational modeling, project management and controls, configuration control, corrective action, and materials science. This work has been done at both BWR and PWR nuclear facilities in the United States and for an international NSSS vendor.His material science background includes metals, glass / ceramics, liquid crystals / electronic materials, and polymers.

This work involved activities varying from process improvements to achieve desired materials properties to computational modeling of energy states and molecular configurations.

Mr. Hostetter is the office lead for information technology (IT) including software testing / verification, and day-to-day IT technical support. He is the chair of IEEE Nuclear Power Engineering Committee Working Group 6.1 on Accident Monitoring Instrumentation (IEEE Std 497) and led the working group through a successful revision of the standard.

He is also performing research in support of new plant licensing

[design certification (DCD), combined license (COL) application].

EDUCATION MSE, Materials Science and Engineering, University of Michigan BS, Materials Engineering, University of Cincinnati REGISTRATIONS I CERTIFICATIONS I TRAINING Engineer-in-Training (EIT) -Ohio, 2000 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Certified by LeBlond and Associates, LLC -2007 GOTHIC Training Course by Numerical Applications, Inc -2007 HVAC Basics -TRANE- 2009 Project Management 101 -Tetra Tech -2010 Loss Prevention and Control -Tetra Tech -2011 Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM No. 1463112) -PMI -2011 CORPORATION PROJECT EXPERIENCE Senior Engineering Consultant, 2011 to Present Project Manager, 2010 to Present Tetra Tech, Ann Arbor, MI (formerly Advent Engineering Services)Primary responsibilities include technical lead on thermal hydraulic analyses, project management and client interface

/ program management.

As technical lead for thermal hydraulic analyses, leads a team of engineers responsible for HELB and room heat-up environmental analyses using the GOTHIC computer software for both Design Engineering and Engineering Programs at nuclear operating plants. These analyses include determination of environmental parameters, fluid flow modeling, and evaluation of equipment qualification

/ operability I functionality within the given environment.

Project management responsibilities include proposal creation, project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, and management of project personnel.

Responsible for managing numerous projects for utility clients that are both short term and multiple year projects, ranging from staff augmentation to task driven projects, overseeing 10-20 engineers.

He is the program manager for all nuclear work with Xcel Energy as well as the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and is responsible for all aspects of the company's interface with the utility from project inception through project closeout.Additional non-technical activities include providing training to engineering and office staff, company marketing and sales, and support of the company QA Program.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI1 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 8 of 27 Engineering Consultant, 2009 to 2010 Lead Project Engineer, 2009 to 2010 Advent Engineering Services Responsibilities include technical lead on thermal hydraulic analyses and project management.

As technical lead for thermal hydraulic analyses, leads a team of engineers responsible for HELB and room heat-up environmental analyses using the GOTHIC computer software.

Project management responsibilities include project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, management of project personnel, and primary interface contact for the client. He is responsible for all Advent work with Xcel Energy including Monticello and Prairie Island. Additional non-technical activities include IT coordination and providing training to engineering and office staff.Senior Engineer, 2006 -2009 Project Lead, 2008 -2009 Advent Engineering Services Engineering related responsibilities include performing evaluations, developing calculations, and originating licensing basis document changes in support of EQ Programs at nuclear power plants. Also responsible for developing thermal-hydraulic analyses using the GOTHIC computer software.

Additional technical areas of responsibility include probabilistic risk assessment work, Combined License (COL)Application work and new reactor design certification support.Management activities include being the companies Project Lead at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. Responsibilities as Project Lead include project scoping, work scheduling, project accounting, management of project personnel, and primary interface contact for the client. Additional non-technical activities include IT coordination and providing training to engineering and office staff.Engineer Level II, 2002 -2006 Advent Engineering Services Responsibilities included performing engineering evaluations, developing calculations, and originating licensing basis document changes in support of fire protection systems and environmental qualification programs at nuclear power plants. Assisted in resolution of EQ condition reports identified at Davis-Besse during the boric acid release event extended outage.Additional responsibilities included developing traffic engineering analysis and simulations to determine emergency evacuation time estimates for nuclear power facilities.

Non-technical

/ engineering activities include project scheduling and IT coordination.

PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE Graduate Student Research Assistant, 2000 -2002 Martin Research Group, University of Michigan Performed molecular dynamics simulation and modeling.

Used molecule modeling, electron diffraction, and X-ray diffraction to analyze and characterize poly-phenylenebenzobisoxazole (PBO). Also studied rubber toughening of nitro-cellulose and acrylic resins, as well as the structural characterization of novel crystal structure using modeling, transmission electron microscopy, and electron diffraction.

Contractor, 1999 -2000 Air Force Research Labs W.P.A.F.B.

Performed polymer morphology

-microstructure characterization using real-time microscopy and polymerization reaction characterization techniques.

Also performed polymer synthesis reactions.

Undergraduate Researcher, 1999 -2000 Beaucage Research Group, University of Cincinnati Evaluated light scattering and reaction characterization of liquid crystalline materials.

Engineering Evaluation 12-EIS Revision 0 Attachment H Page 9 of 27 Co-Op and Part-time, 1997 -1999 Fusite Division of Emerson Electric Company Preformed project management duties such as organization of personnel and technical report writing, as well as materials testing. Other specific skills gained include formulation and processing of glass, development of brazing techniques for metallurgical experimentation, and microstructure analysis using electron and optical microscopy.

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), Member (2008-Present)

IEEE Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC), Alternate Member (2006-Present)

IEEE NPEC Subcommittee 6 on Safety related Systems, Member (2007-Present)

IEEE NPEC Working Group 6.1 on Accident Monitoring Instrumentation (IEEE Std 497), Working Group Chairman (2009-Present), Working Group Member (2006-Present)

American Nuclear Society (ANS), Member (2006-2008), ANS Michigan Section, Executive Committee Member (2005-2009), Finance Committee Chair (2005-2008), Section Member (2006-present) 2nd International Joint Topical Meeting on Emergency Preparedness

& Response and Robotic & Remote Systems, Technical Program Committee Member (2008)American Physical Society (APS), Member (past)PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS Industry Standards IEEE Std 497-2010, Standard for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear Power Generating Stations, co-authored with IEEE/PES/NPEC WG-6.1 Peer Reviewed Publications Hostetter, G.M., Horvath, D.A., "Transition Temperature Considerations When Extrapolating Safety-Related Equipment Post-Accident Operating Times", IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 51(5), 2347, (2004).Hostetter, G.M., "Molecular Modeling of the Structural Evolution in Poly(paraphenylene benzobisoxazole) (PBO) Fibers" [Master's Thesis], Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan;2002.Conference Presentations Hostetter, G.M., Horvath, D.A., "Accident Monitoring During Severe Accidents", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Horvath, D.A., Hostetter, G.M., "Use of Micro-Void Content Growth Rates to Validate and Dd Value to Electrical Insulation Tan-Delta Aging Testing", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Worblewski, N., Horvath, D.A., Hostetter, G.M., Seamans, S., "Unexpected Anomaly Discovered During Qualification Testing of Teflon (PTFE) in Nuclear SealingApplication", Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Nuclear Options in Countries with Small and Medium Electricity Grids, June 3-6, 2012, Zadar, Croatia Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 10 of 27 Steinman, R.L., Hostetter, G.M., "Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis for the Fermi 2 Emergency Planning Zone", ANS 2004 Annual Meeting Transactions, June 13-17, 2004, Pittsburgh, PA.Hostetter, G.M., Martin, D.C., "Molecular Modeling of Structural Evolution in PBO Fibers" Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 47(1), 197, (2002).Hostetter, G.M., Martin, D.C., "Molecular Modeling of Poly-p-phenylenebenzobisoxazole (PBO) / Water / Phosphoric Acid Ternary Phase Diagram", The University of Michigan Macromolecular Science and Engineering Symposium, 2001.Hostetter, G.M., Drummy, L., Vodak, D., Yaghi, 0., Martin, D.C., "High Resolution Electron Microscopy of Triazine-Tribenzonitrile Organic Frameworks", ISMANAM 2001 (International Symposium on Metastable, Mechanically Alloyed and Nanocrystalline Materials), 2001.Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Reaction

-Induced Phase Separation of Polymer / LC Blends", ANTEC Preprints:

Proceedings of the Society of Plastics Engineering, 58(3), 3808, (2000).Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Morphological Investigation of Two-Phase LC/Polymer Films Formed via Reaction-induced Phase Separation", Bull. Am.Phys. Soc., 45(1), 569, (2000).Hostetter, G.M., Beaucage, G., Farmer, B.L., Bunning, T.J., "Phase Separation Kinetics and Structure of Reaction-Induced Polymer Dispersed Liquid Crystal Films", A CS Central Regional Meeting, ACS (Amer. Chemical Soc.), 2000.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 11 of 27 EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

Norbert Wroblewski has four years of experience in the nuclear industry in the areas of mechanical hardware design, engineering calculations, Quality Assurance and outage support. His mechanical design engineering experience includes reactor model construction, repair concept development and modeling, drafting design drawings for manufacturing, design reviews, applying design changes to drawings and documents, and drafting of installation and inspection specifications.

Engineering support experience includes preparing calculations, specifications, procedures, and testing plans. Outage support experience includes review of in-vessel video inspection footage for interferences, and performing time sensitive design changes to expedite outage closure. Work on QA has included the standardization of interference analysis in an Engineering Procedure and the development and implementation of a QA project instruction manual.EDUCATION 2007 MS, Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan 2006 BS, Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University REGISTRATIONSICERTIFICATIONS Completed Mechanical Design Fundamentals (GEH, 2009)Completed BWR Refueling Floor Training (GEH, 2009)CORPORATION PROJECT EXPERIENCE Engineer Level II, 2010 to present Tetra Tech Advent, Ann Arbor, MI Currently providing support for the cataloging and closure of the NRC's Request for Additional Information during the licensing of the US-APWR. Past responsibilities have included detailed review of drawings and specifications for inputs to room heat up and HELB calculations, detailed review of published component testing results for inputs into aging tests for equipment qualification, drafting of test procedures, preparing of calculations and reports, providing Quality Assurance support to the US-APWR Engineering Procurement drafting project, and providing support for the drafting and editing of EOPs and ERGs for the US-APWR.Hardware Design Engineer, 2008 to 2010 GE-Hitachi (GEH), Wilmington, NC Designed conceptual repair hardware for BWR nuclear reactors using Autodesk Inventor, created detailed part and assembly models and drawings for reference and for manufacturing, drafted installation and inspection specifications, worked closely with tooling and analysis groups to ensure feasibility of repair installation and compliance with NRC regulations, and provided engineering support during hardware installation during refueling outages. Duties also included participation in design challenges and reviews, peer review of engineering designs and documents, drafting of engineering procedures, and streamlining engineering processes.

Accomplishments include completion of Mechanical Design Fundamentals coursework, three accepted Intellectual Property submissions, a successfully employed time/cost savings method, and the successful installation of both first-of-a-kind hardware designs and several routine repair hardware designs.PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Member, American Nuclear Society (ANS), Michigan Chapter PUBLICATIONS AND PATENT APPLICATIONS Tsuruga Dryer Repair/Mitigation Method Concepts, GEHI-0000-0109-7593 (GEH Proprietary Document)Duane Arnold Feedwater Sparger Cold Spring Restoration Repair, Technical Safety Evaluation

Report, Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 12 of 27 GEHI-0000-0086-0575 (GEH Proprietary Document)KKM Summary Description of the Shroud Head and Separator Modifications, GEHI-0000-0104-7027 (GEH Proprietary Document)US Patent Application No. 20100246744

-Apparatus

& System for Dampening the Vibration Experienced by an Object US Patent Application No. 20110135049

-Apparatus

& System for Restricting the Movement of a Component USPTO no. 12/850218

-Method and Apparatus for a BWR Jet Pump Support System Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 13 of 27 Brian J. Zapata, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.Project Manager Education The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Ph.D., Infrastructure and Environmental Systems, May 2012 Dissertation: "Full-Scale Testing and Numerical Modeling of a Multistory Masonry Structure Subjected to Internal Blast Loading" M.S. Civil Engineering, 2007 B.S., Civil Engineering, 2003 Area of Concentration:

Structural Engineering Licensures Professional Engineer -North Carolina, South Carolina, New York Structural Engineer -Hawaii Professional Experience Dr. Zapata has nine years of professional experience in structural, blast, and forensic engineering.

He currently serves as a Project Manager responsible for overseeing various structural and forensic projects for government and private sector clients. He has experience in the analysis, design, and renovation of commercial and industrial structures, including office buildings, warehouse and distribution centers, manufacturing facilities, fossil power facilities, and nuclear power facilities.

His experience encompasses the major structural foundation and framing systems including reinforced concrete, structural steel, masonry, and timber. In addition, Dr. Zapata possesses expertise in the design of blast resistant structures and structural dynamics, performing design work for private and public sector projects.

Dr. Zapata also has experience in explosives and blast testing, finite element analysis, materials investigations, building condition surveys, nondestructive testing, and structural instrumentation.

Project Experience Lead Structural Engineer.

Containment Restoration Proposal Assessment.

Crystal River Unit 3. Crystal River, Florida. Dr. Zapata coordinated a diverse team of specialists including structural engineers, finite element modelers, and construction industry experts. Provided direction on project tasks, conducted site visits to CR3, coordinated the technical component of the assessment effort and wrote and assembled an interim and final report. Delivered project on a very aggressive schedule.

Provided critical analysis on a first of a kind project. (2012)Project Manager. Stacking Tower Lift. Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek, NC.Dr. Zapata performed the engineering design necessary to lift the Belews Creek Steam Station radial stacking tower off of its foundations.

This permitted the center pivot and powered trucks to be replaced.

Work included a condition assessment, repair recommendations, and modifications to the structure to permit the 125 ton lift. (2012)Prolect Mana2er. Crane Uprating Analysis.

Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek.NC. Dr. Zapata performed a structural analysis to confirm the capacity of the overhead crane in the Crusher House. Engineering included a structural model of the runway beams and supporting structure and recommendations on retrofits to increase the structure's capacity.(2012)

Engineering Evaluation 12-EI8 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 14 of 27 Proiect Manager. FGD Primary Classifier Overflow Tank Personnel Platforms, Belews Creek Steam Station. Belews Creek, NC. Dr. Zapata designed new steel framing to support personnel platforms over the FGD Primary Classifier Overflow Tanks for Belews Creek Units #1 and #2. (2012)Proiect Manager. UNC System Campuses Pre-Disaster Miti2ation Planning.

UNCC, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata provided consulting services on subcontract to UNCC as part of a pre-disaster mitigation planning program for the UNC University System under contract from FEMA. Dr. Zapata directed development of screening tools and methodologies to rank the vulnerability of University assets to damage from natural disasters.

Using the prioritized facilities lists, Dr. Zapata performed on-site surveys at every UNC System campus to identify specific vulnerabilities and make recommendations for mitigating actions. (2008-2011)

Project Engineer.

Physical Security Analysis.

New Bank of America Office Tower, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a nonlinear progressive collapse analysis according to established Unified Facility Criteria guidance.

Dr. Zapata also designed blast resistant walls and appurtenances for the facility's mailroom.

The project was able to provide the client with a realistic assessment of the progressive collapse resistance of the proposed structure.

Test Director.

RFID as Explosive Triggering Mechanism.

Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata designed and coordinated a full scale demonstration of the fact that active RFID equipment can be used to trigger explosive devices. Dr. Zapata oversaw construction of the prototype triggering device, supervised the setup of the field test, and provided photography, video, and documentation of the test for the client.Project Engineer.

Trichloroethylene Forensic Investigation.

Tinker AFB. OK. Dr. Zapata assisted in developing and calibrating a groundwater model to analyze subsurface transport of chlorinated solvents at an active Air Force base. As part of the work, Dr. Zapata wrote software to externally couple PEST and FEFLOW to permit the estimation of in situ conductivities.

Dr.Zapata also wrote software to analyze well pump test data to estimate soil conductivity experimentally.

(2009)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Concrete Tunnel, Buck Steam Station. Rowan County, NC.Dr. Zapata performed calculations to determine if an existing reinforced concrete reclaim tunnel could accommodate an opening for a new feeder system. (2009)Project Engineer.

Design of Reclaim Tunnel System. Tyrell. NC. Dr. Zapata assisted in the design of a new reclaim tunnel system for Duke Energy's Marshall Steam Station. The project required design of new concrete structures and the structural retrofit of an existing concrete structure to accommodate conveyor system openings.

The project also included numerous steel platforms supporting vibrating machinery.

(2009)Project Manager. Errazuriz Landfill Gas Flare. United Nations, Santiago.

Chile. Dr.Zapata managed a project based out of ZAPATA's Santiago office in which a small landfill gas flare was installed at a Santiago landfill.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Parking Garage Evaluations.

CB Richard Ellis, Dallas. TX. Dr. Zapata assisted in performing visual condition assessments of two existing, multistory parking structures, and provided recommendations for repairs. (2008)

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 15 of 27 Project Engineer.

Roof Loading Analysis.

Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of an existing floor system at an industrial facility.

The on-site survey and analysis identified numerous flaws in the construction and design of the flooring system. (2008)Project Engineer.

Feasibility of Bulldozer Impact Protection System, Marshall Steam Station, Terrell NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the feasibility of adding a concrete encasement to the existing stacking towers at Marshall Steam Station. The stacking towers were subject to impact by bulldozer and required protection.

The analysis was performed to verify the structural capacity of the existing stacking tower system to support the added loads of a concrete encasement.

The project required extensive finite element modeling using 2D and 3D elements to determine structural capacity.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Highly Deformed Corrugated Metal Pipe Tunnel. Marshall Steam Station, Terrell NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the capacity of a highly deformed corrugated metal pipe tunnel. The calculations were used to determine permissible loads on the ground surface and determine the factor of safety. In addition, Dr. Zapata conducted regular measurements of the deformation to identify any temporal trends in an effort to identify the potential for collapse.

(2008)Projeet En2ineer.

CPCC Facade Upjrade, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of the existing student and faculty parking decks to determine if they could sustain the load of new cladding.

Dr. Zapata also designed a footing for the new stairwell tower and performed finite element soil structure interaction modeling to determine tower deflection under wind and seismic events. (2008)Project Engineer.

Spreader Beam Matrix Evaluation, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata evaluated the structural capacity of the existing spreader beam matrix in Bank of America Corporate Center's chiller plant. Dr. Zapata developed drawings showing the existing beam layout, identified the capacity of the system as it exists, and designed an expansion for the spreader beam matrix to permit lifting heavy chiller motors. (2008)Project Engineer.

Parking Deck Collapse, Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata assisted in the design of temporary structural shoring for recovery operations at the collapse site. Dr. Zapata provided on-site supervision of the rigging and crane crew to prevent further structural damage and to provide documentation of forensic evidence.

Dr. Zapata performed analyses and was able to identify the cause of the collapse.

These findings were documented in a written report submitted to the County as a requirement for reconstruction of the structure.

(2008)Project Engineer.

Charleston Square Apartments, Auburn AL. Dr. Zapata performed design calculations for multiple four story timber framed apartment buildings and designed the lateral force resisting system. The project required close coordination with the architect as the architectural design of the structure was being updated concurrently with the structural design process. (2008)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Overtime HVAC Costs. Charlotte NC. Dr. Zapata performed an analysis of the water cooled chiller system at One Independence Center to develop an hourly cost for billing tenants requesting overtime HVAC. Dr. Zapata also assisted in identifying and troubleshooting errors in the facility's BTU metering system. The project resulted in considerable savings for the property owner and accurate billing for the tenant. (2008)Project Engineer.

Parking Garage Evaluation and Repairs, Bank of America Plaza.Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a structural evaluation of an existing multi-story parking Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 16 of 27 garage, and provided recommendations for repairs. Dr. Zapata also provided field supervision of the structural repairs while coordinating and maintaining garage operations.

(2007)Project Engineer.

Physical Security Analysis, New Bank of America Office Tower, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed a nonlinear progressive collapse analysis according to established Unified Facility Criteria guidance.

Dr. Zapata also designed blast resistant walls and appurtenances for the facility's mailroom.

The project was able to provide the client with a realistic assessment of the progressive collapse resistance of the proposed structure.

(2007)Proiect Engineer.

Analysis of Concrete Plate Floor Capacity, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata performed an analysis of the concrete flat plate floor system at a Bellsouth communication center in preparation for increased loading from high capacity batteries.

(2007)Project Engineer.

Analysis of Soil Vapor Migration, Charlotte, NC. Dr. Zapata programmed a one dimensional finite element program to analyze transient soil vapor migration.

The model included the novel feature of barometric pumping to model the enhanced surface fluxes created by changes in barometric pressure.

(2006)Project Engineer.

ITC Garage Wind Panels, Charlotte, NC. Trammell Crow. Dr. Zapata performed finite element modeling of connections to support a large decorative wind panel system to cover the east facade of the International Trade Center parking garage. (2005)Project En2ineer.

Building Settlement Investigation and Repairs, Matthews, NC.Presbyterian Hospital Matthews.

Dr. Zapata designed and installed a data acquisition system to monitor basement walls for excessive movement under the force of pressure grouting on the soil side of the basement wall. (2001)Research Experience Blast Testing for Code Calibration.

UNC Charlotte.

Dr. Zapata performed data acquisition, data analysis, and hydrocode modeling for a project designed to study the performance of several high explosive compounds.

The project required over six days of blast testing in the field during which overpressure measurements were made for several types of high explosive.

These pressure measurements were then used to calibrate airblast models for use in experiment design.Evaluation of NCDOT Bridge Analysis Procedure.

The project was designed to evaluate current NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) bridge load rating procedures.

This project included the in-situ load testing of seven bridges in Charlotte, NC, including the first composite bridge deck in the Carolinas.

Dr. Zapata designed the sensor configuration, assisted in installing sensors, and programmed the data acquisition system.Dynamic Behavior of Curtain Walls. The project was designed to study the low amplitude dynamic behavior of glass curtain walls. Information gathered during the project was later used to validate a finite element model. Dr. Zapata installed dynamic sensors, programmed the data acquisition system, and performed data analysis.Strengzthening of Masonry Shear Walls. The project was designed to investigate the possibility of using fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) systems to increase the capacity of masonry shear walls in low rise buildings.

The experiments yielded several commercially feasible methods which significantly enhanced shear capacity.

The results of this test helped secure funding from the National Science Foundation to perform full scale tests of the retrofit methods.The full scale tests were performed on one-story structures built in the lab and retrofitted with Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 17 of 27 FRP. The full scale testing validated the results obtained on component level tests. Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, specified instrumentation, and programmed the data acquisition system.Ouasi-static Load Testing of Curtain Walls. This project tested full-scale curtain wall systems to failure. The information has been used to generate resistance functions which will be employed in future non-linear analyses.

Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, installed sensors, and programmed the data acquisition system. Dr. Zapata also compared the static elastic deflection of the curtain walls to a finite element model developed for his master's project.Structural Properties of Prefabricated Structural Panels. This project was designed to quantify the shear, flexural, and axial capacity of prefabricated structural panels. Dr. Zapata set up and programmed the servo-hydraulic piston system, installed instrumentation, and programmed the data acquisition system.Stren2thenin2 of Spandrel Beams in Torsion. The project was designed to study the optimal method for wrapping reinforced concrete spandrel beams with fiber reinforced polymers (FRP)to enhance torsional capacity.

Dr. Zapata assisted in construction of specimens, installation of FRP, and installation of strain gages.Shear Strengthening of Existing Beams in a Hospital.

This project validated a retrofit technique for enhancing the shear capacity of concrete beams in an existing hospital.

Dr. Zapata installed instrumentation and programmed the data acquisition system.Evaluation of Steel Tension Connection for Power Plant. This project validated a tension connection designed beyond the limits of traditional AISC guidance for use in a power plant. Dr.Zapata installed instrumentation and programmed the data acquisition system.Dissertation Research University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Graduate Student, 2003-2005 This National Science Foundation funded project studied both the blast loading and the dynamic response of a coal fired power plant subjected to blast loads. The experimental program included the detonation of three explosive devices inside the boiler house prior to its demolition.

The structure was instrumented with pressure transducers, accelerometers, and strain gages. A variety of analytical methods were tested to compare analytical predictions of deflection and blast pressures to those measured during the experiments.

Masters Degree Research University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC Graduate Student, 2003-2005 Participated in project designed to study the dynamic behavior of curtain wall systems subjected to low-level transient loads. Built linear elastic finite element model using ANSYS and calibrated the model using experimental data. The software accurately modeled the curtain wall system and is currently being used to study curtain wall systems subjected to low-level blast loads.Internships Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM Internship, 2006 Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 18 of 27 Worked as an intern at Sandia National Laboratories for the Thermal and Reactive Processes Group. Performed CTH simulations of airblasts producing comparisons of CTH to empirical airblast data for a variety of charge sizes and standoffs.

Performed calculations to determine if CTH JWL equation of state parameters were self consistent with regard to energy and CJ state parameters.

PUBLICATIONS Weggel, David C., Brian J. Zapata, and Michael J. Kiefer. "Properties and Dynamic Behavior of Glass Curtain Walls with Split Screw Spline Mullions." Journal of Structural Engineering Vol.133, No 10, 2007.Weggel, David C. and Brian J. Zapata. "Laminated Glass Curtain Walls and Laminated Glass Lites Subjected to Low-Level Blast Loading." Journal of Structural Engineering Vol. 134, No. 3, 2008.Zapata, Brian J. and David C. Weggel. "Blast Resistant Curtain Wall Subjected to Low-Level Blast Loading." Proceedings of the 25th International Modal Analysis Conference.

February 19-22, 2007 Orlando, Florida.Zapata, Brian J. and David C. Weggel. "Collapse Study of an Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Building Subjected to Internal Blast Loading." Journal of the Performance of Constructed Facilities Vol. 22, No. 2, 2008.Zapata, B.J. and D.C. Weggel. "Computational Airblast Modeling of Commercial Explosives." Tenth International Conference on Structures Under Shock and Impact. May 14-16, 2008, Algarve, Portugal.SKILLS Computer:

CTH, ANSYS, LSDYNA, PLAXIS, Matlab, Maple, MathCAD, AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Adobe Photoshop, Visio, UNIX/Linux/Windows, HP VEE, BenchLink Data Logger, SAP 2000, RISA General: Structural Design, Finite Element Analysis, Experiment Design, High Speed Data Acquisition, Structural Dynamics, Data Analysis, Explosives Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 19 of 27 Clinton D. Robertson, P.E., LEED AP Project Manager Education The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, TN BSE, Structural Engineering, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, May 1994 Special Training Building Codes in North Carolina, Lorman Education Services, 2006 LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations V2.2, Technical Review Workshop Charlotte

-Mecklenburg Certified Site Inspector Training Course Forensic Engineering, 'Professional Development Program, UNC Charlotte OSHA 10-Hour Construction Industry Safety & Health Licensure Professional Engineer, 2006, North Carolina, No. 032084 Professional Engineer, 2006, South Carolina, No. 25410 Professional Engineer, 2007, Tennessee, No. 109013 Professional Engineer, 2008, Virginia, No. 044180 Professional Engineer, 2011, Georgia, No. 036436 Professional Engineer, 2011, Florida, No. 73531 Professional Engineer, 2012, Kentucky, No. 28840 Professional Affiliations and Honors American Society of Civil Engineers, 2004 -Present Structural Engineers Association of North Carolina, 2009 Treasurer, 2010 & 2011 President Professional Experience Mr. Robertson has more than nine years of professional experience in civil, structural and forensic engineering.

He also has over eight years of team and project management experience.

He currently serves as a Structural Engineer responsible for overseeing various structural and forensic projects for government and private sector clients. He has extensive experience in the design and renovation of commercial, residential, and industrial structures, including hotels, multi-story residential buildings, office buildings, hospitals, gymnasiums, warehouse and distribution centers and manufacturing facilities.

His experience encompasses the major structural foundation and framing systems including reinforced concrete, structural steel, masonry, and timber. In addition to his structural design experience, Mr. Robertson has experience in civil site design, including grading and erosion control plans, sewer and storm water design, plumbing, and mechanical and electrical design for small commercial construction.

Project Experience Structural Engineer.

Marshall Steam Station Reclaim Tunnel. Terrell, NC. Duke Energy Carolinas.

LLC. (Project #1232). Mr. Robertson performed the structural design for the analysis and design of a new reclaim tunnel to replace tunnel #1 with cast-in-place concrete coal vaults and precast concrete tunnels on concrete auger piles and grade beams. The structural design of the coal vaults and conveyor tunnels required the analysis of coal piles and D 1I bulldozer surcharge loads. Mr. Robertson also reviewed and oversaw the production of Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 20 of 27 construction drawings and specifications, reviewed construction submittals, responded to requests for information and provided other construction administration support. Mr. Robertson managed two team members for the project.Structural Engineer.

FORSCOM HO Review, Fort Brag2. NC. Fort Bra2, DPW.(Project #1273). Mr. Robertson performed the review of the structural engineering design of the new Combined FORSCOM/USARC Headquarters at Fort Bragg consisting of a 483,000 sf Headquarters building, a 53,000 sf Server Farm, 9,500 sf of IT services and control areas, and a 27,500 sf Disaster Recovery Center. The review included checks of plans, specifications, and structural calculations.

Regular responses to design submittals were submitted in a timely manner. ZAPATA was the quality assurance team for the end client.Structural Engineer.

FORSCOMIUSARC Annex at the Old Bowley School, Fort Bragg.NC. Fort Bragg, DPW. (Project #1291). Mr. Robertson provided structural design and analysis to support the renovation of the nine-building 54,000 sf Old Bowley School facility that converted classroom spaces into cubicle workspaces.

Mr. Robertson provided structural support for the renovation of common space into conference rooms (one SIPR), training rooms, storage space and a large auditorium.

The project is LEED-Silver.

Mr. Robertson managed one team member for the project.Structural Engineer.

JSOMTC Medical Training Building.

Fort BragR, NC, DPW.(Proiect #1342). Mr. Robertson provided structural design for the design and construction of a new training facility at Fort Bragg, by providing the design team with the design of the foundation for the pre-engineered metal building, as well as supervised and reviewed the construction drawings.

Specifications were produced that provided guidelines for the biding and construction of the building's structural systems. Direct coordination with users, as well as review.meetings, were conducted to maintain the interface with the client. Review meetings were held at kick-off, 65% and 95% with stakeholders from the Post, including DWQ, Environmental and DPW. To ensure quality all deliverables were peer reviewed and then reviewed by management and senior management in accordance with engineering division protocols.

The project site is located in a high security area. This resulted in several constraints on location and placement of the structure.

The structure was ultimately located so that is was further constrained by existing utilities, facility drainage ditch and the fence line. By working with the end user we were able to satisfactorily accommodate these challenges.

Mr. Robertson managed one team member for this project. (12/2009 -6/2010)Structural Engineer.

EPRI Test Stand Evaluations.

EPRI. (Prooect #1296). Mr. Robertson led a team of structural engineers and technicians to assess the steel structural support stands that support heavy steel test samples. Each support stand had to be measured, dimensioned and drawn in CAD software.

The type of steel the stands were constructed of had to be determined.

An assessment of the support capacity of the stand was then determined.

The final deliverable was CAD drawings of the stand and a load capacity certification for each stand. Initial meeting and final reports on each test stand were provided.

Mr. Robertson managed two team members for this project. (2009)Structural Engineer/Pro*ect Manager. Georgia Pacific -Rock Hill, Sterling and Athens.Georgia Pacific. (Project #1238). Mr. Robertson performed site visits and visual assessment of the wood treatment drip pads of the plants located in Rock Hill, SC, Sterling, GA and Athens, AL. The assessment was to determine if the wood treatment facilities drip pads met the EPA regulations 40 CFR 265. Mr. Robertson assessed the entire slab taking photographs and notes for each of the three facilities.

He produced a report outlining the repairs to be made and methods of performance as well as suggested maintenance requirements for each of the facilities Engineering Evaluation 12-EI1 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 21 of 27 to remain in compliance with EPA requirements.

Meetings were held with Plant Managers at each site visit and a final report with recommendations for repair and maintenance was provided.Ensured quality by providing sufficient time to assess facility and sending all reports to management for review and edit before sending to client. Mr. Robertson managed one team member for this project. (2008 -2012)Project Mana2er/Structural Engineer.

Hefner VAMC Bldg. 42 LTC and Hospice.Salisbury, NC (1341). RPA Design. Mr. Robertson performed the project management and structural design for a 12 bed hospice addition to the Long Term Care building.

The addition is a separate single story cold-formed steel framed building with separate entrance.

In addition to the Hospice building, Mr. Robertson also provided consulting services to the renovation of areas in the main Long Term Care building including the conversion of patient rooms into a Hotel and the removal of steel members in the atrium area to open it up and make it more aesthetically pleasing.

Mr. Robertson managed an associate engineer and drafting technician to complete the structural design and contract documents ahead of schedule.

He attended planning meetings with the architect and client, as well as weekly conference calls, periodic coordination meetings and email and phone calls as necessary.

The project was designed to meet local building codes although it is a Government/VA project. To ensure quality internal review of engineering design and construction documents was performed by the Engineering Manager. (August 2009 -March 2010)Project Manager. Structural Engineer.

Department of Veterans Affairs, Consolidated Patient Account Center; 2500 S Lakemont Ave. Orlando, FL; Structural Services (Project#1328). Mr. Robertson performed the structural engineering design and oversaw the production of construction documents for the addition of a three story elevator tower addition to the existing precast concrete moment frame building.

Mr. Robertson also provided structural guidance and consultation to the renovation of the third floor of the existing precast concrete framed facility.Determination of the building structural systems was critical in providing advice to the design team on what could and could not be demolished.

The structural system was a composite construction of precast pre-stressed concrete beams and joists and poured-in-place concrete columns, slabs, and beams. This was determined by reviewing the existing structural drawings and by visually inspecting the structure.

Mr. Robertson managed two team members for the project. Coordination with the client included conference calls with the design team held every other week; and meetings with the design architects were conducted as needed. To ensure quality, the structural design was reviewed at every stage by the engineer of record. (2009)Structural Engineer.

Birkdale Village Parking Deck Assessments; Huntersville, NC.Developers Diversified Realty (Project #1288). Mr. Robertson performed the structural condition assessment of four two-story precast concrete parking decks at Birkdale Village in Huntersville, NC. The assessment included extensive site observations and photographic documentation.

A final report was provided for each parking structure categorizing the structural distresses as needing immediate, near future, or planned maintenance repairs. Mr. Robertson was responsible for managing CAB of the Carolinas, concrete repair subcontractors.

Client interface included keeping the property manager informed on progress of project on a regular basis. All site visits were required to be performed during non-peak hours. (09/2008 -06/2009)Structural Engineer.

MOB Support Facility -Fort Gordon, GA. CDA Architects (Project#1273). Mr. Robertson performed structural design and analysis for a truck load-out mobilization unit at Fort Gordon, GA, producing foundation design and permit drawings.

The project included a three-bay enclosed pallet and load-out building with offices, a new roadway, parking, and storage. The project re-used existing scales with upgraded monitoring and controls.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 22 of 27 The project was designed for and achieved LEED Silver accreditation.

Mr. Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

(2008)Structural Engineer.

UNC System Campuses FEMA Inspection, UNC Charlotte (Prolect#1243). Mr. Robertson provided consulting services on subcontract to UNCC as part of a pre-disaster mitigation planning program for the UNC System under contract from FEMA. Using a prioritized facilities list, Mr. Robertson performed on-site surveys at every UNC System campus to identify specific vulnerabilities and make recommendations for mitigating actions. Client interface included coordination of on-site inspection and attending review meetings to coordinate results. Mr. Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

(2008)Structural Engineer.

Forensic Analysis and Remedial Design Following Partial Collapse of Parking Deck, Charlotte, NC (Project #1265). CB Richard Ellis. Mr. Robertson assisted in the forensic investigation and remedial design including the emergency response to the failure, emergency shoring design, assessment of the failure mechanism, and photographic documentation.

The analysis included laboratory support for the metallurgical analysis and a weld inspection by certified welding inspectors.

Mr. Robertson worked with precast/pre-stressed concrete contractors to provide a remedial design that corrected the failure mechanism and resolved other potential failure locations, proactive repairs, and general maintenance.

Mr.Robertson was responsible for one direct employee.

Regular site visits were required during construction to meet with the owner to discuss plans to repair the failure and provide responses to owner and contractor questions.

Regular period reports of site visits were provided to the general contractor and owner's representative.

A final report documenting the failure and the repairs was provided to the owner. (03/2008 -09/2008)Structural Engineer/Progect Manager. Structural Design of Charleston Place Apartments.

Auburn. AL. The Charleston Place student apartment project in Auburn, AL, included structural engineering for 11 buildings of two to four story structures with over 250,000 square feet of living space and an estimated construction cost of $14,000,000.

The wood framed structures used a combination of wood panel shear walls and steel framing. Mr. Robertson led a team of engineers, designers and drafters to produce the complex structural design ahead of schedule.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis of Roof Structure.

Triad Center. Greensboro.

NC. New condensing units were scheduled to be installed on the roof of the Triad Center in Greensboro, NC. Mr. Robertson was commissioned to analyze the roof structure of the existing building and determine if it can carry the additional load of the condensing units. A report was prepared with Mr. Robertson's professional opinion regarding the addition of new condensing units. (2008)Structural Engineer.

Structural Assessment of Five Story Precast Parking Deck, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural assessment of a five story precast parking deck located in Charlotte, NC. A report was written that documented all visual distresses in the concrete slab, precast concrete members and bolted and welded connections.

The report provided the owner with a tool to classify the distress as needing immediate repair, near future repair or general maintenance repair. (2008)Structural Engineer, Preliminary Structural Design of Proposed Five Story Parking Deck, Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a preliminary structural design of a proposed five story precast concrete parking deck for Central Piedmont Community College. The preliminary design assessed the loads on the structure and Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 23 of 27 the bearing loads of the proposed columns in order to assess the soil stress and bearing capacity.(2008)Structural Engineer.

4th Story Apartment Balcony Structural Assessment.

Charlotte.

NC.Mr. Robertson's expansive wood construction experience made him the perfect candidate to evaluate the structural failure of the 4th story balcony at an apartment complex in Charlotte, NC.It was determined that water intrusion had caused structural failure of the engineer lumber supporting the balcony. Mr. Robertson provided the owner with a solution to repair the structural failure along with a complete assessment report. (2008)Structural Engineer.

Structural Design of Precast Stair Addition to Existing Parking Deck.Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed structural design of an addition of two precast stairs to a five level parking garage. The design accounted for wind and seismic loads. The foundation was designed to prevent overturning do to wind and/or seismic loads. The construction drawings were provided to the client for permit. (2008)Structural Engineer, Intake Bridge Evaluation.

Chester Metropolitan District.

Fort Lawn.SC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of engineers to perform an assessment of the Intake Bridge at the clean water filter plant for the Chester Metropolitan District at Fort Lawn, SC. The project involved a visual assessment of the prestressed double tee concrete bridge and steel bents. A report describing the observations, the assessment, and the allowable load rating for the bridge was provided.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis and Design of Sluice Gate Installation, Chester Metropolitan District, Fort Lawn, SC. Mr. Robertson performed structural analysis and design of a new sluice gate to be installed in the clean water filter plant for the Chester Metropolitan District at Fort Lawn, SC. The project involved strength analysis of the concrete flume, location of reinforcing steel using a pacometer in the top of the flume to be cut, the design of the sluice gate and field observations of the concrete cutting process. (2008)Structural Engineer.

Structural Analysis of Plaster Cornice at Historic 16 S. Broad St., Charleston, SC. Mr. Robertson performed a site structural analysis and intrusive investigation the of the historic plaster cornice for the historic Wachovia Bank building in Charleston, SC.Mr. Robertson prepared a report describing the condition of the plaster cornice and required remedial action to preserve the historic plaster cornice. Mr. Robertson designed a repair and provided details to secure the cornice and prevent future damage by high winds or earthquake.

(2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis for 5th Street Jack and Bore Project. Bank of America Building, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson performed structural analysis for the jack and bore project to connect the new Bank of America building with the International Trade Center in downtown Charlotte, NC. The project consisted of analyzing the effect of boring into the basement wall of the ITC building and designing a securing solution to bore through the shoring of the building being constructed.

Mr. Robertson provide design details for boring through the shoring and the foundation wall of the ITC for use in the project drawings for the jack and bore. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Analysis of Spreader Beam Matrix, Bank of America Corporate Center, Charlotte.

NC. Mr. Robertson was part of the team that performed structural analysis of a spreader beam matrix designed to carry the load of the chiller units for the Bank of America Corporate Center mechanical systems. The beams were analyzed to determine if they could carry the additional load of the new up-sized chiller units. The beams were Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 24 of 27 required to carry the load of the motors while maintenance was performed.

A report with recommendations for revisions to the spreader beam matrix was provided to the client. (2008)Structural Engineer/Pro~ect Manager, Renovate Four Company Operations Buildings, Fort Brags, NC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of design professional consisting of architects, and civil, mechanical and electrical engineers to renovate four buildings originally constructed in 1999 for use as a storage facility.

The expected use of the facility after renovation was a company operations facility for the Airborne 525th Battlefield Surveillance Brigade. The second floor of the four buildings was transformed from open storage to assembly and office space. The design team provided plans for renovation on an accelerated deliverable schedule that reduced the design time by 40%. (2008)Structural Engineer, Structural Evaluation of Building FaCade, Wachovia Building, Columbia, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural condition survey of a cracked precast concrete fagade panel. The evaluation included an external and intrusive visual structural examination.

Mr. Robertson oversaw and assisted in the removal and replacement of the interior finished in order to determine the cause of the facade distress.

Mr. Robertson provided a report that included possible cause and recommendations for structural remediation.

Mr. Robertson oversaw the repair construction of the distressed facade panel. (2008)Structural Engineer/Project Manager, Renovate 1935 Building for TV/Audio/Photographv Studio, Fort Braag, NC. Mr. Robertson lead a team of design professionals consisting of architects, and civil, mechanical and electrical engineers to renovate a historic 1935 military facility.

The original use of the facility was a "Mule Barn." The expected use of the facility after renovation was a high-tech TV/Audio/Photography studio for use by the Directorate of Information Management.

The design had to consider budget, technology, use, and historical significance.

The team provided plans for renovation on schedule that were sensitive to need, budget, and historic relevance.

(2008)Structural En2ineer/Project Manager, Bank of America Corporate Center and Founders Hall Fall Protection for Window Washers and Exterior Building Maintenance Evaluation, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson headed up a team that evaluated the existing conditions of fall protection devices and equipment, compared it with current codes, regulations and standards, and provided CAD drawings documenting current conditions.

A thorough report including recommendation for compliance with current codes, regulations, and standards was provided to the client. (2007)Structural Engineer, Structural Evaluation of 206 S. Church Street Parking Garage, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a structural condition survey of a steel framed parking garage. The evaluation included a visual structural examination and revealed several deficiencies requiring remedial action. Mr. Robertson oversaw mapping of the distresses in CAD format for a report that including recommendations for structural remediation provided to the client. (2007)Structural En2ineer/Proiect Manager. Residential Structural Design of Cedar Gables II -Duplex, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed the structural design of the 2,800 sf duplex and oversaw production of the construction documents.

(2007)Structural En2ineer, Structural Evaluation for Installation of New 2MW Generator.

Gateway Villa2e, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a Structural Evaluation of the roof framing below the proposed location for the new 2 MW generator planned for installation on the Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 25 of 27 roof of the GWV 800 building.

Mr. Robertson also oversaw non-destructive testing, x-raying and pacometer testing of concrete floor and roof piers. (2007)Structural Engineer, Independence Parking Deck Structural Condition Assessment, Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed a thorough structural condition survey of a precast concrete parking garage. The evaluation included a visual structural examination and revealed several deficiencies and construction defects requiring remedial action. A comprehensive report including recommendations for remediation was provided to the client. (2007)Structural Engineer, Structural Assessment of Bank of America Plaza Parking Garage, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson performed field observations of structural defects and/or defects and provided an opinion regarding required repairs. Mr. Robertson also assisted in the oversight of the repair construction.

(2007)Structural Engineer, Structural Evaluation of Floor Capacity, BellSouth, Caldwell St., Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson examined existing drawings and performed a structural evaluation using ADAPT-RC v5.00, of the 3rd floor of the BellSouth building on Caldwell St. in Charlotte, NC. The original structure was built in 1928 and added on to in 1953. An analysis of building codes for the construction years was required.

(2007)Prolect Manager/Structural Engineer, Mayfair Townhomes Poured in Place Concrete Retaining Wall, Charlotte, NC. Mr. Robertson engineered and managed the design of a 13'maximum height, 650' long poured-in-place concrete retaining wall. Unique soil conditions required the use of micro piles in specific locations.

The wall retained a pond and roads. (2007)Structural Engineer, South Point Baptist Church Family Ministry Center, Belmont, NC.Mr. Robertson engineered the structural systems and supervised the preparation of the structural drawings for a new multi-use facility.

The 17,740 sf masonry building had eave heights of 25'3".(2007)SKILLS Computer:

AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Adobe Photoshop, RISA Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 26 of 27 Instructions for Completing Checklist This peer review checklist may be used to document the review of the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL) in accordance with Section 6: Peer Review. The space below each question should be used to describe any findings identified during the peer review process and how the SWEL may be changed to address those findings.

Additional Space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.1. Were the Five Safety Functions adequately represented in the SWEL 1 Selection?

Y 0 N El Each safety function (reactor reactivity control, reactor coolant pressure control, reactor coolant inventory control, decay heat removal, containment function) is represented by at least 45 items on the list. The list includes 42 items that fall into all 5 safety function categories.

2. Does SWEL 1 include an appropriate representation of items having the following sample selection attributes:

a. Various Types of Systems? Y M N El Of the 27 different systems, 13 are represented by just 1 or 2 items in the list. Initially this was a concern, however, even 1 or 2 samples are enough to represent at least 10% of the available equipment for these systems. Therefore, it is believed that each system is adequately represented in the list.b. Major new and replacement equipment?

Y 0 N El Seven (7) of the approximately 100 items on the walk-down list are new or replacement equipment.

It is believed that older equipment is more likely to be found with degraded or insufficient anchorage, and therefore it is appropriate for the majority of the SWEL list to be comprised of older equipment.

c. Various Types of Equipment?

Y N N El Of the 22 different classes of equipment, all are represented by at least 1 item. Of those 22 classes, 11 are represented by 1 or 2 items but this sample size represents at least 10% of the available equipment for these classes. Therefore, each equipment type is adequately represented in the list.d. Various Environments?

Y N N E]During the development of the SSEL, components in 23 elevation

/ compartments were identified across 8 facilities (Control Building, Diesel Generator Building 1, Diesel Generator Building 2, Drywell, Intake Structure, Multi-purpose Facility, Reactor Building, and Yard) for potential walk-down.

Of those 23 compartments, all but one (Drywell, 972 elevation) has a component selected for walk-down.

Although drywell elevation 972' does not have a selected item for walk-down, 10 other drywell components are subject to walk-downs.

The various environments at CNS are adequately represented in the list.

Engineering Evaluation 12-E18 Revision 0 Attachment H Page 27 of 27 e. Equipment Enhanced based on the findings of IPEEE (or equivalent) program? Y 0 N E]Twenty (20) of the approximately 100 components on the list have been previously included in the IPEEE program at CNS. Considering these items have been recently upgraded and are therefore more likely to be in acceptable condition, IPEEE enhanced equipment is adequately represented on the list.f. Were risk insights considered in the development of the SWEL 1?Y M NE1 Fifty four (54) of the approximately 100 components on the list are identified as Risk Significant.

Risk significance was determined using a combination of CNS PRA insights and IPEEE results.Given that over half of the components subject to walk-down fall in the risk significant category, appropriate risk insights were adequately considered during the development of the list.3. ForSWELI2 a. Were spent fuel pool related items considered, and if applicable included in SWEL 2? YN NEI Spent fuel pool related items were considered while generating the list. CNS and the walk-down team determined that some components could be potentially crucial for operation despite not being classified seismic class 1; these items were included on the list.b. Was an appropriate justification documented for spent fuel pool related items not included in SWEL 2? Y El N El Not Applicable

-Spent fuel pool related items were considered while generating the SWEL 2 list, as stated in 3.a.4. Provide any other comments related to the peer review of the SWELs Additional reviews of SWEL 1 were performed concurrently with the walk-downs of components and area walks-bys.

Very few components on the SWEL 1 list have been changed due to accessibility or schedule issues, but those that have been changed were reviewed and found acceptable.

5. Have all peer review comments been adequately addressed in the final SWEL?Y 0 NE Peer Reviewer #1: Norbert Wroblewski Peer Reviewer #2: Greg Hostetter DATE: 10/26/12 DATE: 10/26/12 ZACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment I Evaluation Client Comment Form Attachment I, Page 1 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRiY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC 2W Document Typ: GPOD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM EE No.: 12-E18 Rev: 0 EECN No.: N/A (i d4ebe)Date: 11/15/2012 This form is to provide an easy method to return owner review comments.

Please return this form to the originator listed below. If you have no comments, please indicate as such.FROM: Clinton Morris Originator Name (860) 405-3079 11/19/2012 Phone Number Expected Return Date Reviewer.

Greg Hostetter (Tetra Tech) No. of Pages: 4 Printed Name% r- eDate: A 71__ ___6 :2 __ __(Signature signifies all comments have been resolved to your satisfaction)

Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

1. Section 4.0 should not point to the "Peer Review" Attachment A "Personnel Qualifications" was added section of a summary of the personnel to the report and Section 4.0 was changed to refer qualifications.

It should Include a summary or point to Attachment A.to an Attachment.

2. Section 4.0: No one is marked as having This statement was added to Section 4.0 after responsibilities for the IPEEE Reviewer.

Mitch's Table 4-1: "The IPEEE Reviewer column is left last name is spelled wrong. Peer Review also has blank because no vulnerabilitles were identified requirements; should there be a column for this? during the IPEEE program and therefore no reviews were required.

For further discussion, see Section 8.0 "IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report"." Mitch's last name was corrected.

The Peer Review team members are listed in Section 9.0 "Peer Review". The following statement, included In Section 4.0, points the reader to the Peer Review section for a description of the Peer Review team. "For a list of the members on the Peer Review team, see Section 9.0: "Peer Review"." Attachment I, Page 2 of 11R Revision 0 ZACHI-IY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

3. Section 5.0: Discuss the reason that SWEL items The following statement was added to section 5.7: are being deferred (i.e. Inaccessible). "CNS was unable to perform walkdown inspections on 4160 Switchgear G, 480 Switchgear G, and Critical Distribution Panel 1 B (CDP1 B) due to plant conditions requiring these components to remain energized.

These components cannot be de-energized with the plant in operation, and must be done during a unit outage. CNS performs buss outages for inspections on a rotational basis, and during RE27 (the current outage) no critical busses were scheduled for removal from service for inspection.

Critical Buss G is scheduled for inspection during RE28 in the fall of 2014. This will allow inspection of all of the above items." 4. Section 5.0: A detailed description of the criteria CNS is an A-46 plant in which their SSEL was implemented during the SWEL 1 screening derived using the same 5 criteria required in EPRI process is included per the guidance, however, the Report 1025286. The SSEL has a diverse and Base List 1 (equipment coming out of Screen #3) complete representation of the 5 criterion.

The has not been provided, intent of the first 3 screens was to narrow the scope of eligible SSCs for plants that did not have an A-46 or IPEEE program.Page 8-2 EPRI Report 1025286 states: "The following two lists of equipment should be included in the submittal report from the equipment selection process shown in Figure 1-1 for "Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions":

• Base List 1. The equipment coming out of Screen #3 and entering Screen #4 in Figure 1-1 is defined as "Base List 1" This list of equipment should be included in the submittal report." As described above, the Base List 1 is the SSEL.This lengthy document could be resubmitted in this engineering evaluation, but Zachry elected to reference the SSEL instead. This should be acceptable since the EPRI document stated"should" and therefore not a requirement.

If CNS desires to include the SSEL (Base List 1), this could be accomplished.

Attachment I, Page 3 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHIIRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZN! Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment [ Resolution 5.Section 5.0: The same applies to SWEL 2, the screening process is described in detail, but Base List 2 is missing.Page 8-3 EPRI Report 1025286 states: The following three lists of equipment should be included in the submittal report from the equipment selection process shown in Figure 1-2 for "Spent Fuel Pool:.Related Items": Base List 2. The equipment coming out of Screen #2 and entering Screen #3 in Figure 1-2 is defined as "Base List 2." This list of equipment should be included in the submittal report.* Rapid Drain-Down.

The equipment coming out of Screen #4 and entering the SWEL 2 bucket in Figure 1-2 is the equipment that could potentially cause the SFP to drain rapidly. This list of equipment should be included in the submittal report. The basis for determining which SSCs could or could not cause rapid drain-down should also be described in the submittal report.* SWEL 2. The equipment coming out of Screens#3 and #4 and entering the SWEL 2 bucket in Figure 1-2 is the second Seismic Walkdown Equipment List. This list of equipment along with a description of the distribution of the various sample selection attributes among the items on SWEL 2 should be included in the submittal report.Per Section 5.5.1 of the Zachry EE: "Only the Spent Fuel Pool concrete structure, metal liner, and spent fuel storage racks are designed as Seismic Class I.The remaining components and piping are Seismic Class IIS, therefore per EPRI Report 1025286, the CNS SFP screens out." Since the eligible SFP SSCs are not seismic, EPRI Screens 2 and 3 are also not applicable to the SWEL 2 as stated in the Zachry EE Sections 5.5.2 and 5.5.3 respectively.

Therefore, no Base List 2 should have been created since the Screen 1 filtered out all SFP SSCs. The Rapid Drain down list from Screen 4 is the SWEL 2, which is included.Attachment I, Page 4 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRIY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

6. Section 6.0: Provide a summary of the findings Subsection 6.1 "Summary of Results" was added, from the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys.

describing the findings from the walkdowns and Additionally include a table of identified potentially walk-bys.

The table listing the CR's was moved adverse seismic conditions.

from Section 7.0 into Section 6.1 and an additional column for the current status of the CR was added.Also move to section 6.1 was the description of the CR categories.

An additional table was created that shows the number of CRs generated in each category.7. Section 7.0: Were any licensing basis evaluation For the CNS Walkdowns and Walk-Bys, all completed or are they all being performed via the potentially adverse seismic conditions were entered CAP items? into the CAP program without performing a licensing basis evaluation.

This was done to comply with current CNS procedures for CRs and identified potential problems at CNS. To make this clearer, Section 7.0 "Licensing Basis Evaluations" was expanded to discuss this reasoning.

8. Section 7.0: The CRs themselves have not been Copies of the CRs were added in Attachment E of attached to the Submittal Report, therefore there is the report. Additionally, a column was added to no way of knowing the specifics regarding what Table 6-1 that describes the current status of the equipment was noncompliant in licensing space, CRs.what will be done to remedy the noncompliance, or the stage or schedule of corrective action implementation.

9. Section 8.0: A list of adverse seismic vulnerabilities As stated in Section 8.0 of the Submittal Report: identified during the IPEEE program has not been "Based on the CNS submittal to the NRC of their included in the Submittal Report. IPEEE program [Ref. 10.12], there were no cases where vulnerabilities identified required immediate attention.

All of the vulnerabilities identified, except one, were addressed and resolved by the resolution of outliers in the USI A-46 (GL 87-02) [Ref. 10.5]program. The one remaining potential vulnerability was resolved when subsequent system analysis by CNS identified that the air handling systems in question could be removed from the SSEL (Safe Shutdown Equipment List) since they were no longer needed for safe shutdown.Therefore, there are no IPEEE vulnerabilities to report at CNS." Attachment I, Page 5 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document T*pe: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM EE No.: 12-E18 Rev: 0 EECN No.: N/A (if applicable)

Date: 11/15/2012 This form is to provide an easy method to return owner review comments.

Please return this form to the originator listed below. If you have no comments, please indicate as such.FROM: Clinton Morris Originator Name (860) 405-3079 Phone Number 11/19/2012 Expected Return Date Reviewer:

Mitch Marotz (CNS) No. of Pages: 6 Printed Name Date: Z/ z/z Signature (Signature signifies all comme htve been resolved to your satisfaction)

Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

1. Page 6 of 35, what is documenttcalc that The calculation for the design response spectra is discusses design response spectra? NEDC87-162.

In section 3.0, a reference to the calculation was added [Ref. 10.17]. In Section 10, reference 10.17 was added for calculation NEDC87-162.

2. Page 7 of 35, Is there a calc that derives the The figures were developed from the measured figures on page 8-11 ? Taft earthquake accelogram and do not originate from any calculation.

The specific section of the USAR stating this is properly referenced in the report. Additionally a reference was added, the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, which is consistent with section 5.2.3.1 of the USAR.3. No other basis for 2.5" or less provided (page 12 of The basis for the 2.5" diameter or less piping is 35)? Appendix C, Section 3.3.3.2 of the CNS USAR. The statement was changed to read: "For Seismic Class IS piping systems less than 21/" in diameter, as outlined by Appendix C, Section 3.3.3.2 of the CNS USAR, piping and supports were field routed using span and load chart tables." The statement now provides the justification for Seismic Class IS piping systems less than 2.5" in diameter.4. What date/year for top two codes used? For ACI 318-63, the "-63" indicates that the year for this code is 1963. However, to be clearer, the year was added. The year was also added for AISC 6 1h Edition.Attachment I, Page 6 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHMI-KY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

5. Need to specify which are CNS vs. Zachry guys on The company designation were added to each Table 4-1 (page 13 of 35) individual in Table 4-1.6. Is there a reference document for SSEL list (page The SSEL was provided by CNS to Zachry for this 14 of 35)? Engineering Evaluation and first appears on Page 13. The SSEL on Page 13 is referenced as: "The base equipment list used as a starting point for development of the SWEL 1 list was the Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) developed to address the NRC Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46, "Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating Plants," as required by NRC Generic Letter 87-02 [Ref. 10.5] and expanded upon in the CNS IPEEE Program submittal

[Ref. 10.12]." The SSEL was taken from the IPEEE Program which is referenced in the statement above. Therefore, no change is required 7. What does licensed operator review have to do EPRI Report 1025286 states on Page 3-5: with this (page 14 of 35)? "In the process of selecting equipment for the sample, it is recommended that the Equipment Selection Personnel consult with and obtain advice from plant operators and others (e.g., systems engineers, maintenance personnel, etc.). For example, operators may be able to identify equipment with operational issues or that have been exposed to repeated maintenance activities.

Such activity may have left the equipment in a state that no longer conforms to its seismic licensing basis." Zachry's understanding is that an operator did review the SSEL and SWEL 1 & 2. We did receive comments from Operations.

Since specifically discussed in the EPRI guidance, Zachry feels it is relevant to discuss the licensed operator review.Therefore, no change is required.8. What specifically did you use/get out of FAQ's to Section 5.0 of the Zachry EE describes the provide our SWEL list? requirements of EPRI Report 1025286 (Section 3)in regards to selection of the SSCs for the SWEL.The FAQs were used to better define the EPRI requirements and is described how we utilized the FAQs in the section titled "CNS Responses to SWEL 1 Screening Criterion".

Generally, the FAQs eased the burden on many plants. FAQ Section numbers were added to each reference in order to bring attention to the specific guidance used (see Sections 5.4.1, 5.4.4 (b) and 5.4.4 (c) of the final submittal report).Attachment I, Page 7 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZN! Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

9. Was screen process iterative (taken together) or The following statement was added to Section 5.4: one at a time? Did you have to meet all screens to "The SSEL was used as a base list for developing get the 101 items or just meet one of screens? SWEL 1. The SSEL was developed utilizing the same selection criteria described in the EPRI Report 1025286 for the SWEL. Therefore, all the SSCs on the SSEL are eligible for the SWEL 1." Additionally, the following statement was added to Section 5.4.4: "The process used to select the 101 items was iterative and continued until the targeted SSCs for each of the considerations listed below was established.

During the actual walkdowns, some SSCs were substituted to reflect plant conditions (inaccessibility, protected train, etc.) and slightly (but still acceptably) skewed the selected SSCs distribution." 10. What list did you use for new or replacement On page 21 of the Zachry EE, the Section titled: basis? Major New and Replacement Equipment (CNS Response) describes the selection process for new or replacement SSCs. In short, we reviewed/used the DCDs, Redbank, Zachry experience, CNS and personnel experience.

A FAQ clarified the new/replace list does not need to be comprehensive and only a sample of the new/replaced items needed to be on the SWEL.The FAQ continued: "Another approach that may be used for identifying major new and replacement equipment is to first select equipment based on the other four sample selection attributes (i.e., variety of systems, equipment types, environments, and IPEEE enhancements).

Then, go through that list of equipment and identify whether any of those items had been added or replaced during the past approximately 15 years." The new/replaced list was developed as recommended in the latter FAQ suggestion of developing the SWEL 1 first then populating that sample with new/replaced items. No suggested sample size was provided by EPRI. The specific section from the FAQs was added in Section 5.4.4 (b) where this is stated. Additionally, a reference to EPRI document page 3-7 was added in discussion of the SWEL list review by engineers and plant operators.

Attachment I, Page 8 of 11 Revision 0 ZACH-IRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

11. General SWEL discussion seems useless info on The EE numbering was inadvertently deleted page 18 and 19. Delete it. before the 11/20/12 issuance, which made this section difficult to read. The intent of this section was to describe the due diligence of the team in the development of the SWEL (interviews, OE, etc.).This section is not required by EPRI however Zachry believes it further elaborates on the due diligence in the development of the SWEL. No change is required.12. This reads hard, what did CNS really do on these The EE numbering was inadvertently deleted Screens? before the 11/20/12 issuance and will be fixed. CNS developed and provided the A-46 and IPEEE, which are the basis of the SWEL. The responses are consistent with the responses from other sites that have prepared their SWELs (Kewaunee, Monticello, Millstone).

They are short response designed to only answer the guidance in Section 8 of the EPRI report. No changes required.13. Page 21 of 35 -need to specify what exactly we The development of the New/Replace list is screened to. NRC gave us grief on this selection.

described in comment 10 above. No further changes required.14. Define "each class" on SSEL (page 22 of 35) The descriptions of the Classes are in Attachment B and are referenced several times in the EE. A reference to Attachment B was added in Section 5.4.4 (c).15. List specific drawing that the SFP information Added to this section was a call-out to References came from. (page 24 of 35) 10.9 and 10.10. Reference 10.10 is the drawing that the SFP information came from.16. Deferred Items: What is tracking these at CNS A statement about CR 2012-9521 being issued to (page 25 of 35)? List the CR number Marotz track the completion of these items was added to provided you. the "Deferred Items on SWEL" section.17. Define adverse better (page 26 of 35) or tie it The following statement was added to this section: better to the items reviewed or inspected. "An adverse condition is a condition of a SSC that cannot be shown to meet its seismic licensing basis." 18. Where can we put the 101 items selected as it The walkdowns checklists are provided in relates to 164 walkdowns (page 21 of 35) -cross Attachment C of the report. The walkdown number reference to the WC# somehow? provided is the SWEL item number. The component ID is also listed on the walkdown checklists.

Additionally, each walkdown has a reference to an area walk-by, for which the checklists are provided in Attachment D. Therefore, the SWEL items and walkdowns already provide sufficient cross-references and no changes are required.Attachment I, Page 9 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRIY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNM Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

19. This infers we did not put all issues into CR's The sentence was changed to state: "If it was (page 31 of 35) determined to be an adverse seismic condition or a determination could not be easily made from the information available, the condition was input into the CAP process." This clarifies that all adverse seismic conditions or uncertain items were entered into the CAP process.20. Can't we specify what our vulnerabilities are? What The "IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report" was the one not addressed specifically (page 31 of Section was revised to include a list of the identified 35)/ with what analysis?

vulnerabilities from the IPEEE program.Additionally, a discussion of the resolution and proper reference of the documentation of that resolution was added.21. Should we specify it was another contractor (page The words "from an independent contractor (Tetra 32 of 35)? Tech)" were added to clarify that another contractor completed the Peer Review.22. What is the basis for 10% sample? Why not more? The basis for 10% of the walkdowns being (page 33 of 35) reviewed was the EPRI guidance document.

A statement has been added saying this.23. Draft Report? (page 33 of 35) The word "draft" was removed.24. The final statement in Section 9.2 should be Per Tetra Tech, the statement was revised to say, revised. "There was sufficient detail provided to conclude that an adequate review of all available equipment appears to have been completed." 25. Readdress the page numbering, specifically the The page number that is referred to, is the form numbering in the footer (always says page 1 of 1). page number. Above that, the page number of the document it listed. However, to avoid confusion, the form information was removed entirely from the footer.26. Fix sentence breaks from page to page, Formatting has been fixed.specifically on page 7 of 35 where a partial sentence is on the same page as a figure.27. Section 4 -add justification for no checks in the A note was added discussing the reasoning behind IPEEE column, remove column, or add the SWEL leaving the IPEEE Reviewer column blank.developer and the person looking at the IPEEE vulnerabilities as the IPEEE reviewers.

28. Page 14 of 35- "Safety Related I (Essential)

Revised as requested.

Seismic Category I" should be "Safety Related (Essential Seismic Category I".29. Page 14 of 35 -"choose" should be "chose" Revised as requested.

30. Page 25 of 35 -called out 480F and then 480G. The section was revised to state that 480F would They both should be 480G due to accessibility or be changed to 480G so that it could be inspected explain that the initial list had 480F and it was during the RE28 outage. Also changed the callouts change to 480G. to be consistent.

Attachment I, Page 10 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHRY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNM Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION CLIENT COMMENT FORM Item Reviewer's Comment Resolution

31. Mitch Marotz needs "Qualification of Seismic The "Qualification of Seismic Walkdown Project Walkdown Project Personnel" sheet in Attachment Personnel" sheet for Mitch Marotz was added to A. Attachment A.32. Per EPRI Guidance Section 6 (page 6-3), Peer A space was provided on the coversheet for Peer Review Team leader needs to sign off on the Review Team leader's signature.

report. Recommend putting an additional signature on the cover page for the leader with a designation that he is with Tetra Tech.33. Attachment B: Item 101 is marked as The intent was to examine the strainer after it was New/Replaced.

How is this correct as it is original installed during this outage. Construction delays construction equipment?

prevent this from happening.

The SWEL has been updated to reflect the SSC was not New/Replaced.

34. Page 22: Nee to explain that in Attachment B This is not the case. The outlier column comes from (Outliers) column is how we denoted IPEEE the SSEL and is associated with the A-46 list as a Enhanced Equipment, if that is the case. previous identified vulnerability.

Cooper fixed them.The IPEEE column indicates the associated components which were evaluated in accordance the CNS IPEEE program. The SSCs and the correlating A-46/Outlier/IPEEE designations all come from the SSEL. The SWEL did not change or alter this information.

No changes required.Attachment I, Page 11 of 11 Revision 0 ZACHIaY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD Attachment J Evaluation Review and Verification Information Attachment J, Page 1 of 2 Revision 0 ZACHI-IY ZACHRY NUCLEAR, INC.ENGINEERING EVALUATION 12-E18 COOPER NUCLEAR STATION SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT FOR RESOLUTION OF FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC ZNI Document Type: QAPD ENGINEERING EVALUATION VERIFICATION FORM 1. VERIFICATION METHOD: 2. EXTENT OF VERIFICATION:

No Complete Evaluation (including attachments) has been reviewed to determine impact of revision on un-revised areas.A. Approach Checked B. Logic Checked C. Arithmetic Checked D. Alternate Method (Attach documentation or forward to QA)E. Other*Describe below.Yes 0*0 I-T*A. IDV of Complete Evaluation (including attachments)

B. IDV of revised areas of Evaluation only.C. Other (describe below): IDV of all Sections and Attachments of the evaluation, except Section 9.0 'Peer Review"[]3. DOCUMENTATION OF VERIFICATION:

The approach, logic, and methodology of the evaluation are acceptable.

The requirements of Paragraph 7.7 of N0302 (as applicable) have been met. The overall evaluation is found to be valid and conclusions to be correct and reasonable.

IDV Signature:~a¶A VlrJ.1/Printed Name: James McKinney Date: 11/26/12 O (Signature also signifieY all comments have been resolved to your satisfaction)

• Verification Method: N/A Attachment J, Page 2 of 2 Revision 0