Part 21 Report - 1997-780

ACCESSION #: 9710070133 Coltec Industries Fairbanks Morse Engine Division 701 White Avenue Beloit, WI 53511-5492 608/364-4411 FAX: 608/364-0382 INTERIM LETTER To: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC. 20555 From: Coltec Industries-Fairbanks Morse Engine Division (FMED) Date: 30 September 1997 Subject: Weldments on Opposed Piston and Coltec-Pielstick Emergency Stand-By Diesel Gen-Set Lube-Oil and Jacket Water Piping Systems On 4 August 1997, FMED became aware that a weldment associated with the lube-oil piping system failed at Millstone Unit 2. Further investigation by the utility revealed less than full penetration in the affected weld. The condition was observed in a weld joint associated with a 4 inch mechanical tube section with a .250 inch wall located on the lube oil pump discharge piping. At this time, the root cause of the Millstone piping failure is not yet known. However, due to the fact that the failure occurred in a weld with partial penetration, the quality of the weldment is being considered. The welds at issue are the original welds performed in the late 1960s, and early 1970s; when contract requirements did not invoke either ASME Section III, Class 3 Piping, or ANSI B31.1 Piping design requirements. The following utility sites are affected: Arkansas Nuclear One Millstone 1 & 2 Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2 North Anna 1 & 2 Crystal River 3 Peach Bottom 2 & 3 Duane Arnold Energy Center Plant Hatch 1 & 2 Farley 1 & 2 Prairie Island 1 & 2 Fermi 2 & 3 Vermont Yankee A division of Coltec Industries, Inc. Coltec Industries, Fairbanks Morse Engine Division is currently conducting an evaluation under the rules of 10 CFR Part 21. Pipe sections returned from Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River 3 and sections of pipe from a spare unit returned by Baltimore Gas & Electric earlier this year provide the source for initial samples currently being analyzed by FMED. Additional samples of lube-oil and/or jacket water piping have been requested from Florida Power, Millstone and Vermont Yankee. As a minimum, the following questions will be answered as a result of the evaluation. 1) is the weld design compliant with customer requirements? 2) are the subject welds compliant with FMED design requirements? 3) if not, do the existing welds posses sufficient strength? 4) what is the root cause of the identified condition? 5) what corrective action, if any, should the customer take? 6) what preventive action is required by FMED? It is estimated that the evaluation will require an additional six (6) to ten (10) weeks to complete. Sincerely, Scott A. Fratianne Sr. Quality Assurance Engineer *** END OF DOCUMENT ***

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, January 31, 2020