ML20079E810

Final Deficiency Rept,Item E-53 Re Switchgear Wiring Diagram Discrepancies.Initially Reported on 830922.All Discrepancies Resolved.Deficiencies Not Reportable Under 10CFR050.55(e)

ML20079E810
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	01/10/1984
From:	Williams J CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
E-53, LOZ-83-0263, LOZ-83-263, NUDOCS 8401170444
Download: ML20079E810 (4)

Text

. -- . -- . ~, . .

• + .

ih

/

• ggg=

enit. dg .

4 _

l

' i THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY CINCINNATI.OMIO 45201

?

January 10, 1984 i

LOZ-83-0263-J. WILLIAME JR scusom vn:E PaEssoENT NUCLEAn OPEnATIONS .

$ P =nPHP Docket No.:50-358 fR/- DE yR/ fp31sp _

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1 WA

,L -- 5CS gf 3 Region III 1 v

i ML 799 Roosevelt Road i~

Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Fi le gy Attention: Mr. J.G !?eppler j Regional Administrator i

Gentlemen I

WM . H . ZIMMER NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1

~

RE:

! 10CFR50.55(e), ITEM E-53,-.4.16KV SWITCHGEAR WIRING DIAGRAM DISCREPANCIES W.O. 57300, JOB E-5590, FILE NO. 956C, E-53 This letter constitutes a' final report concerning the subject condition initially reported to the Commission on September 22, 1983 as a' potentially reportable defic.iency under 10CFR50.55(e).

CG&E has-since determined that the condition is not reportable.

Y Our last response, LOZ-83-0185, of October 10, 1983 advised that the subject conditions were identified in nonconformance reports years ago and were being reviewed as part of the Quality confirmation Program.

l .CG&E has completed a review of historic design documents.

Although wiring deficiencies did exist, they were not of a significant nature and would not have adversely affected safe

operation of the plant. A detailed evaluation of the 70 deficiencies identified in our last report follows:

(a) Twenty (20) of the deficiencies were due to incomplete construction. Design changes were made to e the connection diagrams after the switchgear was shipped trom the factory. These changes were not

! accomplished in the field prior to construction testing. The design changes gave directions to field construction.. staff to remove, add, change nameplates 1 or modify installation of devices and/or connections, etc.'in the switchgear. These changes were forwarded to field staff when there was not enough time for them to be incorporated into the switchgear at the factory prior to its shipment to the plant. The o444 g40110  :"

h1gOcK05000350 S

PDR tdAN13 N' Mc)0/ J

y e .

Mr. J.G. Keppler

' Regional Administrator January 10, 1984 LOZ-83-0263 j Page 2 changes requested by these directions wore not of

~

safety significance and did not impact the safety of plant operation.

(b) Thirty-two (32) deficiencies were due to minor

. disagreements between physical wiring and the schematic or connection diagrams. These wiring errors apparently occurred during fabrication. In each case the schematic and connection diagrams were correct. These discrepancies were discovered during the CG&E standard procedure of conducting a point to point wiring check of switchgear wiring against the current schematic and connection diagrams. The errors were of a minor nature and did not represent a significant deficiency in fabrication or construction which required extensive evaluation, redesign or repair. In many cases the physical wiring in the

[ i switchgear, although deviating.from the connection diagrams,.was electrically equivalent and had no impact on the design or operation of the switchgear or its protection systems.

(c) Nine (9) discrepencies resulted due to the ground wire used for connecting instruments, relays, and CT's to the switchgear ground bus, not being upgraded from #14 AWG to #12 AWG by construction before the equipment was turned over for testing. In all cases, connection diagrams reflected a note for the field to

verify if the larger size conductors were actually

provided in switchgear. Operation of the switchgear devices with #14 AWG connections to the switchgear ground bus would not have degraded plant safety.

(d) Six (6) discrepencies resulted from drafting errors involving mislabeling, and inconsistencies between

' connection diagrams and schematic drawings. In all

. cases, one or the other document, and physical wiring in the switchgear were correct. These errors did

not affect system and plant operation in any way.

t Therefore, safety of the plant was not affected.

i

, , _ _ . . _ . _ .._ , . _ _ _ , , _ , . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ , _ , - , , . - - , ~ , -

m

-s Mr. J.G. Keppler Regional Administrator January 10, 1984 LOZ-83-0263 Page-3 (e) Two (2) discrepencies were due to breakage of devices during shipment, erection or after system turn over.

In each case new replLcement components were directed to-be installed. Equipment breakage during plant construction is detected during surveillance and system walk downs and defective and/or broken devices are replaced by new devices prior to pre-operational tests. ~The equipment breakage identified here does not represent.significant damage to a structure, system or component which required extensive evaluation, redesign or repair to meet.the design basis and therefore is not reportable.

(f) One.(1) dis'crepency was an auxiliary relay contact that did not close consistently when tested at 3V dc.

This auxiliary relay was specified and correctly

-rated.to operate at 125V dc. Application of only 3V to the coil did not develop adequate ampere turns to operate the relay successfully. The relay operated natisfactorily when operated at the rated voltage.

Since the relay operates satisfactorily when operated at-the rated voltage,-this, in fact, is no J i- discrepency at all.

All these discrepencies were observed against drawings issued in 1976-7.7. All these discrepencies were resolved and the

' changes to the/ documents and to the switchgear were completed in i 1976-77.

In summary, although wiring deficiencies did exist, they were not of a significant nature, would not have adversely affected safe operation of the plant, and are therefore not reportable

_.under 10CFR50.55(e).-

4 i

i

Mr, J.G. Keppler

, Regional Administrator January 10, 1984 LOZ-83-0263 Page 4 We trust the above will be found acceptable as a final report under 10CFR50.55(e).

Very truly yours, THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY By j# '- - - -

~

. LL'I AR$ , 'JR'. /

• SENIOR VICE PRESID NT DJS/sfr cc NRC Office of Inspection & Enforcement Washington, D.C. 20555 NRC Resident Site Supervisor ATTN: W.M. Hill NRC Zimmer Project Inspector, Region III ATTN: E. R. Schweibinz