000000000001010639

Technical Report
Non-Class 1 Mechanical
Implementation Guideline and
Mechanical Tools, Revision 4
Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in accordance
with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S. Export
Administration Regulations. As a result of this publication, this report is subject to only
copyright protection and does not require any license agreement from EPRI. This notice
supersedes the export control restrictions and any proprietary licensed material notices
embedded in the document prior to publication.
EPRI Project Manager
J. Carey
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE
3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1395 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA
800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com
Non-Class 1 Mechanical
Implementation Guideline and
Mechanical Tools, Revision 4

1010639
Final Report, January 2006

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN
ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH
INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE
ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)
WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR
SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR
INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S
CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER
(INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR
SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD,
PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT
Framatome ANP

NOTE
For further information about EPRI, call the EPRI Customer Assistance Center at 800.313.3774 or
e-mail askepri@epri.com.
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright 2006 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

CITATIONS
This report was prepared by
Framatome ANP
7207 IBM Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
Principal Investigators
M. T. McFarland
M. V. Carter
S. L. Chu
This report describes research sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Non-Class 1 Mechanical Implementation Guideline and Mechanical Tools, Revision 4. EPRI,
Palo Alto, CA: 2006. 1010639.
This report supersedes EPRI report 1003056, Non-Class 1 Mechanical Implementation Guideline
and Mechanical Tools, Revision 3, which replaced EPRI TR-114882, Non-Class 1 Mechanical
Implementation Guideline and Mechanical Tools. TR-114882 was a republication of Revision 2
of the B&W Owners Group version of the report. The current report has been designated as
Revision 4 to indicate the fourth revision of the original B&W Owners Group report.

iii

v
REPORT SUMMARY

As part of the application process for license renewal, U.S. nuclear utilities must perform an
evaluation to confirm that they have appropriately considered aging effects on plant components
within the scope of the License Renewal Rule. An aging management plan must be developed
for all Class 1 and non-Class 1 components subject to aging effects. This report presents a set of
mechanical tools utilities can use to determine which aging effects are applicable to non-Class
1 mechanical components.
Background
Non-Class 1 mechanical components are those that are not within the ASME Section XI,
Subsection IWB, Class I Inservice Inspection (ISI) boundary. Documentation of the non-Class 1
components subject to an aging management review (AMR) is plant-specific and requires
consideration of materials, environment, and component intended function. The Babcock and
Wilcox (B&W) Owners Group initially conducted research to develop a set of material- and
environment-based rules to help utilities identify locations where aging effects may apply in
non-Class 1 mechanical components. EPRI published Revision 2 of the B&W report
(TR-114882) as a set of Mechanical Tools for use by utilities in preparing license renewal
submittals. This fourth revision of the Mechanical Tools incorporates changes that bring the
document in line with current industry practices and recent operating experience, and includes
comparison of the results to information contained in Volume 2 of NUREG-1801, Revision 1,
Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report Tabulation of Results.
Objectives
To document a generic evaluation to determine which aging effects are applicable to passive
and long-lived non-Class 1 mechanical components, based on the material and
environment(s) to which they are exposed, during normal plant operations
To update the Mechanical Tools with recent industry experience related to the preparation
and submittal of license renewal applications, including comparison to information in the
GALL report
Approach
Due to the similarity of material and environmental conditions for mechanical components
subject to AMR, the Mechanical Tools present a set of rules for determining whether certain
material/environment combinations could result in age-related degradation in non-Class 1
mechanical components. The generic components addressed in these tools include: (1) heat
exchangers, (2) tanks/vessels, (3) pumps, (4) valves, (5) piping, tubing, fittings, and branch
connections, and (6) miscellaneous process components. Specialized tools are included for

vi
evaluating bolted closures, heat exchangers, and fatigue. Aging effects evaluated include
cracking, loss of material, change in material properties (such as reduction in fracture toughness
and distortion), and loss of mechanical closure integrity. Environmental conditions considered
include treated water, raw water, air or gas, lubricating oil and fuel oil, and external ambient
environments. The project team evaluated each element of the Mechanical Tools and updated or
revised them as necessary.
Results
The Mechanical Tools included in this report are a set of rules, summarized in flow charts and
tables, that allow utilities to identify aging effects for a given non-Class 1 mechanical component
based on material and environment. These material- and environment-based rules are derived
from known age-related degradation mechanisms and operating experience. In developing the
rules, the states of stress in the mechanical components were typically not known. Developers
assumed, however, that mechanical components experience residual stresses due to fabrication,
field installation, and field welding. A cross-reference to pertinent NUREG-1801 (September
2005) Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report item numbers and considerations is also
provided. This approach resulted in a conservative set of rules for assessing applicable aging
effects.
EPRI Perspective
The use of the Mechanical Tools presented in this report can greatly simplify the process for
determining the aging effects applicable to a broad class of mechanical components for the
license renewal period. Thus, the Mechanical Tools have the potential for dramatically reducing
a portion of the effort required in developing and submitting a license renewal application.
Related EPRI publications include Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components
(Structural Tools) Revision 1 (EPRI report 1002950) and the License Renewal Electrical
Handbook (EPRI report 1003057).
Keywords
Non-Class 1 mechanical components
Aging (materials)
License renewal
Aging management review
LWR

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The original version of the Non-Class 1 Implementation Guide and Mechanical Tools was
prepared under the direction of the B&W Owners Group License Renewal Program (GLRP),
directed by Don Croneberger, GPU Nuclear Corporation, and with the technical support
provided by the Lead Mechanical Project Engineers: Terry Cox, Greg Robison, and Mike
Semmler, Duke Power Company; Terry Kuhn, Joe Mancinelli, and Dave Masiero, GPU Nuclear
Corporation; and Stan Batch and Bill Mackay, Entergy Operations, Inc. In addition, many others
from the nuclear industry contributed to the development of the original report.
Subsequent revisions of the report were prepared under the direction of the License Renewal
Mechanical Working Group (LRMWG). The following members of the Working Group are
gratefully acknowledged for their help, which led to the successful completion of the latest
revision of this technical report.
Andrew Taylor Entergy
Bill Evans Southern Company
David Wootten Dominion
Joe Pairitz Nuclear Management Company (NMC)
Ken Karcher Progress Energy Carolinas
Michael G. Semmler Duke Energy
Richard Schaller Arizona Public Service Company
Ted Ivy Entergy
Although titled Non-Class 1 Mechanical Implementation Guideline and Mechanical Tools,
Revision 4 (EPRI report 1010639), this document is a technical report that includes guidance and
tools for the determination of applicable aging effects, based on material and the environment it
is exposed to during normal plant operations. The guidelines and tools are intended for use in the
performance of an aging management review (AMR) and should not be confused with
information associated with the Industry Materials Initiative and/or the Materials Guidelines
Implementation Protocol.

vii

ACRONYMS
AFW Auxiliary Feedwater
AIF Atomic Industrial Forum
AMR Aging Management Review
AMG Aging Management Guideline (Sandia National Laboratory Document)
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
AWWA American Water Works Association
B&W Babcock & Wilcox
B&WOG Babcock & Wilcox Owners Group
BL IE Bulletin (from the NRC)
BWNT B&W Nuclear Technologies
BWR Boiling Water Reactor
BWROG Boiling Water Reactor Owners Group
CASS Cast Austenitic Stainless Steel
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLB Current Licensing Basis
CR Circulars (from the NRC)
CRDM Control Rod Drive Mechanism
CSCC Caustic Stress Corrosion Cracking
ECCS Emergency Core Cooling System
EFW Emergency Feedwater
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPRI Electric Power Research Institute
ESC Environmental Stress Cracking
FAC Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
FCAW Flux-Core Arc Welding
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIV Flow-Induced Vibration
FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report
GALL Generic Aging Lessons Learned
GE General Electric
ix

GL Generic Letter (from the NRC)
GLR Generic License Renewal
GLRP Generic License Renewal Program
GMAW Gas Metal Arc Welding
GTAW Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
HAZ Heat-Affected Zone
HPI High Pressure Injection
HWC Hydrogen Water Chemistry
IASCC Irradiation-Assisted Stress Corrosion Cracking
IE Inspection and Enforcement (NRC)
IGA Intergranular Attack
IGSCC Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking
IN Information Notice (from the NRC)
IPA Integrated Plant Assessment
ISI Inservice Inspection
LER Licensee Event Report
LPI Low Pressure Injection
MIC Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion
MFW Main Feedwater
MPC Material Properties Council
MS Main Steam
MSS Manufacturers Standardization Society
NEI Nuclear Energy Institute
NPRDS Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System
NPSH Net Positive Suction Head
NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
PAW Plasma-Arc Welding
PWR Pressurized Water Reactor
PWSCC Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking
RB Reactor Building
RCP Reactor Coolant Pump
RCPB Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary
RCS Reactor Coolant System
SAW Submerged Arc Welding Process
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
SCs Structures and Components
x

SER Safety Evaluation Report
SMAW Shielded Metal Arc Welding Process
SOC Statement of Consideration
SSCs Systems, Structures, and Components
TGSCC Transgranular Stress Corrosion Cracking
TLAA Time-Limited Aging Analyses

xi

DEFINITIONS
The definitions for many of the terms used throughout this document are contained in either 10
CFR Part 54 or EPRI BR-101747 (Common Aging Terminology: A Glossary Useful for
Understanding and Managing the Aging of Nuclear Power Plant Systems, Structures, and
Components) and are not repeated here.
Component intended functions are component level functions that support system level intended
functions.
Intended functions are system, structure, and component functions required to demonstrate
compliance with the requirements defined in 10 CFR 54.4 (i.e., safety-related SSCs relied upon
to remain functional during and following design-basis events, non-safety-related SSCs whose
failure could prevent accomplishment of safety-related functions, and SSCs relied upon for the
regulated events).
Regulated events are NRC regulations for fire protection (10 CFR 50.48), environmental
qualification (10 CFR 50.49), pressurized thermal shock (10 CFR 50.61), anticipated transients
without scram (10 CFR 50.62), and station blackout (10 CFR 50.63).
Integral attachments are attachments that are welded to or fabricated as an integral part of the
component itself. ASME Section XI focuses on Integrally Welded Attachments (e.g.,
Examination Category C-D).
Applicable aging effects are aging effects that are plausible for a given combination of material,
environment, and stressors.
Class 1 mechanical components include those mechanical components that are within the
ASME Section XI, Subsection IWB, Class 1 ISI boundary. The Class 1 ISI boundary varies from
plant to plant and includes components within the reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB), as
defined in 10 CFR 50.2.
Non-Class 1 mechanical components include those mechanical components that are not within
the Class 1 ISI boundary. It should be noted that the Class 1 ISI boundary is not necessarily the
same as the reactor coolant pressure boundary; that is, non-Class 1 mechanical components may
be found within the reactor coolant pressure boundary at many of the applicants plants (e.g.,
instrument lines, and tubing downstream of isolation valves or flow-restricting orifices).

xiii

REVISION SUMMARY
Revision History
Revision
Number Description
0 Initial Issue of BAW-2270
1 BAW-2270, Rev. 1
2 BAW-2270, Rev. 2 (republished as EPRI TR-114882)
3 Issued as EPRI report 1003056
4 Issued as EPRI report 1010639, with miscellaneous editorial/grammatical/formatting
changes (for example, changes to section headings, tables of contents, and lists of
tables, figures, and references) and the substantive changes itemized below.
Substantive Changes Made for Revision 4
Front Matter and Main Body of the Report (Implementation Guideline)
Section Description
Front Matter Updated acknowledgments for the License Renewal Mechanical Working
Group review subcommittee; inserted remarks to distinguish between this
technical report and the information associated with other industry activities
related to materials and implementation; added a revision summary
Sect. 2.2.1 Updated listing of heat exchanger components in accordance with
corresponding revision to Appendix G
Sect. 2.3 Updated general discussion of materials covered to include titanium (and
titanium alloys), aluminum (and aluminum alloys), and non-metals
Sect. 3.2 Clarified discussion of Tool utilization (implementation) consistent with current
industry considerations and experience, such as that mitigation programs (e.g.,
Chemistry) should also be included in license renewal evaluations
Sect. 4.1 Clarified discussion of demonstration of aging management consistent with
current industry considerations and experience
Sect. 5 Added discussion and considerations for comparison to GALL, NUREG-1801
Rev. 1 (Sept. 2005), similar to material added to the Structural Tools, Rev. 1
(to target similarities with respect to applicable aging effects)
xv

Appendices A-E
Section Description
App. A Sect. 3.7.2
App. B Sect. 3.8.2
App. C Sect. 3.6.2
App. D Sect. 3.7.2
App. E Sect. 3.8
Updated NRC generic operating experience discussions, as applicable, based
on review of generic communications (from the Tools Rev. 3 publication date
through October 2005)
Sect. 4.4 Added discussion for comparison to pertinent GALL, NUREG-1801 Rev. 1
(Sept. 2005), items and definitions for material, environment, and aging
effect(s) combinations
Sect. 4, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3,
Tables and Figures
Updated summary of potential aging effects (last section of aging effects),
assumptions, overview, tool description, figures, and tables (including
reformatting, specifying pertinent GALL items, and providing discussion),
consistent with other changes
Appendix A Treated Water
Section Description
Sect. 1 Clarified introduction, including a reference to Appendix B for treated water in
drains/sumps that is considered as raw (untreated) water, a reference to
possible use of the tool for submerged components, and an indication that
fluoride thresholds may also apply to BWRs that rely on municipal water
supplies
Various Removed the identification of specific EPRI water chemistry
guidelines/revisions from the text of the appendix
Sect. 2.1.6, 2.1.7,
2.1.8
Updated discussions of titanium and aluminum to include alloys of those
materials, and discussion of non-metals to include more detail with respect to
glass, plastics, and elastomers
Sect. 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2 Updated discussion of environments to include sodium hydroxide and sodium
pentaborate (used in BWR Standby Liquid Control systems vs. PWR borated
water), and to more clearly differentiate between PWR and BWR water
chemistry considerations
Sect. 3 Updated aging effect/mechanism evaluations relative to titanium and aluminum
and their alloys, as applicable
Sect. 3.1.4, 3.1.5 Clarified evaluation of crevice and pitting corrosion, particularly of copper
alloys
Sect. 3.1.1, 3.2.2 Updated evaluation of general corrosion and SCC of copper alloys (with regard
to the presence of ammonia and oxygen)
Sect. 3.1.6 Updated evaluation of erosion and evaluation of flow-accelerated corrosion
(per NASC-202L-R2)
Sect. 3.1.9, 3.2.3,
3.3.4
Added evaluation of caustic corrosion, evaluation of caustic cracking, and
reference for caustic embrittlement
xvi

Sect. 3.2.2, 4.1 Clarified discussion of SCC, including considerations and thresholds; updated
evaluation of SCC for nickel-base alloys and for carbon steel (per EPRI closed
cooling water chemistry guideline)
Sect. 3.5 Added evaluation of fouling as an aging effect versus as a mechanism for loss
of material
Sect. 3.6 (3.6.1,
3.6.2, 3.6.3)
Added evaluation of aging effects for non-metals
Appendix B Raw Water
Section Description
Sect. 1 Clarified introduction, including possible use of the tool for submerged
components or those located in a splash zone
Sect. 2.1 Updated discussions of materials to include titanium and aluminum (and their
alloys), non-metals, and protective coatings (consistent with current industry
considerations and experience)
Sect. 2.2 Clarified environment discussion (and cover page) to indicate that previously
treated water in drains/sumps is untreated and considered as raw water
Sect. 3 Updated aging effect/mechanism evaluations relative to titanium and aluminum
and their alloys, as applicable
Sect. 3.1.4, 3.1.5,
3.1.1, 3.2.2
Updated/clarified evaluation of crevice and pitting corrosion, general corrosion,
and SCC of copper alloys
Sect. 3.1.6 Clarified evaluation of erosion
Sect. 3.1.8, 3.5 Added evaluation of fouling (macrofouling) as a mechanism for loss of material
and updated evaluation of fouling as an aging effect
Sect. 3.1.10 Added evaluation of exfoliation corrosion of aluminum/aluminum alloys with
conclusion that it is not an applicable aging effect
Sect. 3.2.2 Clarified evaluation of SCC, particularly for nickel-base alloys
Sect. 3.2.1, 3.3.1 Moved evaluation of hydrogen embrittlement of titanium from cracking to
reduction of fracture toughness and updated
Sect. 3.6 (3.6.1,
3.6.2, 3.6.3)
Added evaluation of aging effects for non-metals

xvii

Appendix C Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil
Section Description
Sect. 1 Clarified cover page and introduction, including possible use of the tool to
supplement Appendix G (for shells that contain lubricating oil), and to address
aluminum/aluminum alloy and non-metal materials
Sect. 2.1 Updated materials discussions for aluminum alloys, non-metals (including
determination of no applicable aging effects or reference to Structural Tools for
elastomers), and coatings
Sect. 2.2 Clarified environment discussions and swapped the order (lubricating oil to
2.2.1 and fuel oil to 2.2.2) for consistency
Sect. 3 Updated aging effect/mechanism evaluations relative to aluminum/aluminum
alloys and as applicable for other metals
Sect. 3.1.2 Clarified/simplified evaluation of galvanic corrosion
Sect. 3.1.3, 3.1.4 Updated/clarified evaluation of crevice and pitting corrosion, particularly of
copper alloys
Sect. 3.1.5, 3.1.6,
3.1.8, 3.2.2
Clarified evaluation of erosion, MIC, selective leaching, and SCC (conclusion
statements)
Sect. 3.2.1 Updated evaluation of hydrogen damage
Sect. 3.5 Deleted section for loss of closure integrity for consistency with other
appendices; closure integrity is addressed in Appendix F
Appendix D Air/Gas
Section Description
Sect. 1 Clarified introduction with respect to materials and aging effects addressed by
the Air/Gas tool, and to include a cross-reference to other appendices for
related items (consistent with other appendices)
Sect. 2.1 Updated materials discussions for aluminum alloys and non-metals
Sect. 2.2.7 Added discussion of Halon as a gas environment
Sect. 3 Updated aging effect/mechanism evaluations relative to aluminum/aluminum
alloys and change in material properties; removed identification of loss of
closure integrity
Updated evaluation of applicable degradation mechanisms to include the
impacts of plant-specific operating experience that shows aggressive
environments (e.g., coastal areas) in HVAC/air systems whose source is
outdoor air
Sect. 3.1.1 Updated/clarified evaluation of general corrosion
Sect. 3.1.2 Clarified/simplified evaluation of galvanic corrosion (electrolyte in wetted or
aggressive environment [e.g., coastal air])
xviii

Sect. 3.1.3, 3.1.4 Clarified evaluation of crevice and pitting corrosion, particularly of copper
alloys
Sect. 3.2.2 Clarified evaluation of SCC for nickel-base alloys and copper alloys (plant-
specific operating experience shows ammonia in the air)
Sect. 3.3.1 Updated evaluation of thermal aging of galvanized steel
Sect. 3.5 Replaced section on loss of closure integrity with evaluation of aging effects for
non-metals, including a reference to the Structural Tools for elastomers and
determination of no applicable aging effects for glass or plastics
Appendix E External Surfaces
Section Description
Sect. 1 Clarified cover page and introduction with respect to materials (including
nickel-base alloys, titanium and titanium alloys, aluminum and aluminum
alloys), insulation, and aging effects addressed by the tool
Sect. 2.1 Updated discussion of materials to remove reliance on Appendix A for detail
on the materials addressed by the tool (added specific subsections for each
material), including the addition of insulation
Sect. 2.2 Clarified discussion of environments addressed by the tool
Sect. 3 Clarified aging effects addressed, including a reference to Appendix A or B for
submerged (splash zone) or continuously wetted components, and evaluation
of aging effects in the embedded environment (reference to Structural Tools)
Updated aging effect/mechanism evaluations as appropriate relative to nickel-
base alloys, aluminum/aluminum alloys and titanium/titanium alloys
Updated evaluation of applicable degradation mechanisms to include the
impacts of plant-specific operating experience that shows aggressive
environments (e.g., coastal areas)
Sect. 3.1.1 Updated evaluation of general corrosion
Sect. 3.1.2, 3.1.6 Clarified/simplified evaluation of galvanic corrosion (electrolyte in wetted or
aggressive environment [e.g., coastal air]) and MIC
Sect. 3.1.3, 3.1.4 Clarified evaluation of crevice and pitting corrosion
Sect. 3.1.7 Updated evaluation of wear and fretting (determination that aging mechanisms
are not applicable aging mechanisms for external surfaces, except in limited
situations)
Sect. 3.1.10 Added evaluation of boric acid wastage
Sect. 3.2.1 Updated evaluation of hydrogen damage
Sect. 3.2.2 Clarified evaluation of SCC for nickel-base alloys and for copper alloys
(presence of ammonia)
Sect. 3.6 Added evaluation of aging effects for non-metals and insulation (with the
determination of no applicable aging effects for glass, plastic, or insulation, and
reference to the Structural Tools for elastomers aging effects)
xix

xx
Appendix F Bolted Closures
Section Description
Sect. 3.1 Updated evaluation of loss of preload, including addition of and basis for
700F, below which relaxation is not expected
Sect. 3.2 Updated evaluation of bolting SCC for closer consistency with corresponding
discussion in the Structural Tools
Sect. 3.3 Clarified evaluation of loss of material
Sect. 4 Updated summary discussion, as applicable, based on other revisions, and
added discussion (Section 4.1) for comparison to pertinent GALL, NUREG-
1801 Rev. 1 (Sept 2005) items and definitions
Table 4-1 Added table comparing applicable aging effects per the tool to GALL items that
address bolting (or closure bolting)
Appendix G Heat Exchangers
Section Description
Sect. 1.1, 1.2 Clarified discussion of tool scope consistent with current industry
considerations and revisions to other tools
Sect. 4 Clarified description of in-scope heat exchanger component
Sect. 5; Tables 6-2
through 6-7
Updated clarifications and exceptions, as well as notes to summary tables,
consistent with current industry considerations (and the revisions of the other
tools)
Sect. 7 Added discussion and table (Table 7-1) for comparison to pertinent GALL,
NUREG-1801 Rev. 1 (Sept. 2005) items and definitions
Tables 7-2 through
7-7
Added tables comparing applicable aging effects per the tool to GALL items
that address heat exchanger components
Appendix H Non-Class I Fatigue Screening Criteria
Section Description
Sect. 2.2, 2.3 Clarified material and environment discussions consistent with revisions to the
other tools and current industry considerations
Sect. 3.1.1 Updated NRC generic operating experience discussions, as applicable to high
cycle fatigue, based on review of generic communications (from the Tools Rev.
3 publication date through October 2005)
Sect. 4, Figures Added indication that any local component residual stress and/or geometry
specific stress intensification factors can result in lower temperature thresholds
and, therefore, must be evaluated on a plant specific case-by-case basis
consistent with current industry considerations
Sect. 5 Added discussion and table (Table 5-1) for comparison to pertinent GALL,
NUREG-1801 Rev. 1 (Sept. 2005) items and definitions
Table 5-1 Added table comparing tool screening criteria to GALL items that address
cumulative fatigue damage

CONTENTS
Revision History ..................................................................................................................... xv
Substantive Changes Made for Revision 4 ............................................................................ xv
Front Matter and Main Body of the Report (Implementation Guideline) ............................ xv
Appendices A-E.................................................................................................................xvi
Appendix A Treated Water .............................................................................................xvi
Appendix B Raw Water .................................................................................................xvii
Appendix C Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil....................................................................... xviii
Appendix D Air/Gas...................................................................................................... xviii
Appendix E External Surfaces........................................................................................xix
Appendix F Bolted Closures........................................................................................... xx
Appendix G Heat Exchangers ........................................................................................ xx
Appendix H Non-Class I Fatigue Screening Criteria ...................................................... xx
1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1-1
2 NON-CLASS 1 MECHANICAL SCOPE.................................................................................2-1
2.1 Identification of SCs Subject to an Aging Management Review .....................................2-1
2.2 List of Mechanical Components Subject to an AMR.......................................................2-2
2.2.1 Heat Exchangers.....................................................................................................2-3
2.2.2 Tanks/Vessels .........................................................................................................2-3
2.2.3 Pumps .....................................................................................................................2-4
2.2.4 Valves......................................................................................................................2-4
2.2.5 Piping, Tubing, Fittings, and Branch Connections...................................................2-4
2.2.6 Miscellaneous Process Components ......................................................................2-4
2.3 Materials of Construction.................................................................................................2-5
3 MECHANICAL TOOLSAPPLICABLE AGING EFFECTS..................................................3-1
3.1 Development of Mechanical Tools ..................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Treated Water (Appendix A)....................................................................................3-2
xxi

xxii
3.1.2 Raw Water (Appendix B) .........................................................................................3-3
3.1.3 Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil (Appendix C) ...............................................................3-3
3.1.4 Air/Gas (Appendix D)...............................................................................................3-3
3.1.5 External Surfaces (Appendix E) ..............................................................................3-4
3.1.6 Bolted Closures (Appendix F)..................................................................................3-4
3.1.7 Heat Exchangers (Appendix G)...............................................................................3-4
3.1.8 Fatigue (Appendix H)...............................................................................................3-5
3.2 Utilization of Mechanical Tools........................................................................................3-5
4 DEMONSTRATION OF AGING MANAGEMENT ..................................................................4-1
4.1 Requirements for Demonstration of Aging Management ................................................4-1
4.2 FSAR Supplement...........................................................................................................4-1
5 GALL COMPARISON ............................................................................................................5-1
6 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................6-1
A TREATED WATER............................................................................................................... A-1
B RAW WATER........................................................................................................................ B-1
C LUBRICATING OIL AND FUEL OIL .................................................................................... C-1
D AIR/GAS ............................................................................................................................... D-1
E EXTERNAL SURFACES ...................................................................................................... E-1
F BOLTED CLOSURES............................................................................................................F-1
G HEAT EXCHANGERS.......................................................................................................... G-1
H NON-CLASS 1 FATIGUE SCREENING CRITERIA............................................................. H-1

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Typical Materials of ConstructionPiping.................................................................2-6
Table 5-1 Organization of the GALL Comparison Aging Effects Summary Tables....................5-2

xxiii

1
INTRODUCTION
As part of the application process for license renewal, nuclear utilities must perform an
evaluation of aging effects on plant components. An aging management program must be
identified for components that are found to be subject to detrimental aging effects. This report
presents a set of Mechanical Tools for use in determining which aging effects are applicable to
non-Class 1 mechanical components.
The report was initially developed for the B&W Owners group as BAW-2270. In 2000, EPRI
acquired Revision 2 of that document from the Owners Group, republished it as EPRI report TR-
114882, and made it available to all EPRI members. The current document is Revision 4 of the
original report. This revision updates the document based on recent industry experience with
license renewal issues, including the development and review of license renewal applications.
The Mechanical Tools, which are discussed in Section 3.0 and are contained within the
appendices of this document, deal exclusively with non-Class 1 mechanical components subject
to an aging management review for license renewal. Due to the similarity of materials and
operating environments, the Mechanical Tools are presented as a set of tools used to identify
material/environment combinations resulting in applicable aging effects. These aging effects
include loss of material, cracking, change in material properties (e.g., reduction in fracture
toughness, distortion), loss of mechanical closure integrity, and fouling (heat exchangers only).
For license renewal, applicants must ensure, typically through a review of existing programs, that
the identified aging effects are managed so that system and component intended function(s) are
maintained in the period of extended operation.
The process by which license renewal applicants will identify structures and components (SCs)
subject to an aging management review is plant-specific and is discussed briefly in Section 2.0.
A general list of the mechanical components that may be subject to an aging management review
is also contained in Section 2.0. The determination of applicable aging effects using the
Mechanical Tools is discussed in Section 3.0. Programmatic evaluation of applicable aging
effects is described in Section 4.0; however, the programmatic evaluation is a plant-specific task.
The alignment of the Mechanical Tools with the information in Volume 2 of NUREG-1801,
Revision 1, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report Tabulation of Results, from the
perspective of material, environment, and applicable aging effects/mechanisms (aging effects
requiring management) is described generally in Section 5.0.
The material- and environment-based Mechanical Tools are contained in Appendices A through
E. Other specialized tools for heat exchangers, bolted closures, and fatigue are contained in
Appendices F through H, respectively.
1-1

2
NON-CLASS 1 MECHANICAL SCOPE
The mechanical components addressed within this tool include those outside the Class 1 ASME
Section XI, Subsection IWB, ISI boundary and subject to an aging management review (AMR).
It should be noted that the Class 1 ISI boundary is not necessarily the same as the reactor coolant
pressure boundary; that is, non-Class 1 mechanical components may be found within the reactor
coolant pressure boundary at many plants (e.g., instrument lines, and tubing downstream of
isolation valves or flow restricting orifices). The identification of structures and components
(SCs) subject to an aging management review is discussed in Section 2.1. A list of mechanical
components subject to an AMR is provided in Section 2.2. Typical materials of construction are
discussed in Section 2.3.
Although the non-Class 1 tools were not intended to include environments and materials found in
Class 1 systems and components, the use of the non-Class 1 tools for Class 1 components is
acceptable in certain instances. These instances would include situations where the Class 1
materials and environments are the same as the non-Class 1 materials and environments defined
in this document.
2.1 Identification of SCs Subject to an Aging Management Review
For license renewal, applicants must first determine which SSCs are within the scope of license
renewal in accordance with the scoping requirement defined in 10 CFR 54.4. The Integrated
Plant Assessment (IPA), as defined by 10 CFR 54.21 (a)(1), requires that applicants list those
structures and components within the scope of license renewal that are subject to an AMR. An
AMR must be performed on the identified components in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21 (a)(3).
Documentation of the non-Class 1 mechanical components subject to an aging management
review is plant-specific and may be performed on a system-by-system basis utilizing existing
system boundary definitions that are consistent with both the CLB and system intended
functions. Component intended functions (such as pressure boundary) that support those system
functions will also be identified. Each license renewal applicant may establish the evaluation
boundary for each system using the guidance provided in NEI-95-10, Industry Guideline for
Implementing the Requirements of 10 CFR Part 54 The License Renewal Rule [1].
Once the system evaluation boundary is established, the mechanical components subject to an
aging management review within the evaluation boundary may be grouped in accordance with
the list of passive mechanical components in Appendix B of NEI 95-10 [1]. Groups of
mechanical components may be evaluated collectively within the system or across system
boundaries if constructed from similar materials and exposed to similar operating environments.
2-1

Non-Class 1 Mechanical Scope
A typical list of mechanical components subject to AMR is provided in Section 2.2. It should be
noted that the list provided in Section 2.2 is the starting list of passive mechanical components;
additional components may be added to a plants list based on plant-specific findings.
2.2 List of Mechanical Components Subject to an AMR
Within each system in the scope of license renewal, the passive mechanical components subject
to an aging management review may be identified using the passive mechanical components
listed in Appendix B of NEI 95-10 [1] as guidance; this set of reviewable components is
discussed in Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.6. For all such components, the component intended
function must be documented for use during the aging management reviews. Some typical
intended functions for passive mechanical components are listed in Table 4.1-1 of NEI 95-10 [1].
These intended functions include pressure boundary integrity, flow restriction, and heat transfer.
Pressure boundary integrity, as used in the mechanical tools, includes both the pressure boundary
function and structural integrity function of the component.
Pressure boundary integrity applies to components that operate above and below atmospheric
pressure. In all instances, the pressure boundary portions of the non-Class 1 mechanical
components are defined by applicable design codes, for example, ASME Section III, Classes 2
and 3, ASME Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, AWWA, USAS B31.7 (Classes II and III), and
USAS B31.1.0.
Many of the mechanical components within the scope of license renewal contain gaskets,
packing, and seals which are not relied upon for a pressure retaining function per ASME Section
III (NX-2121). The systems, structures, and components within the scope of license renewal are
set forth by 10 CFR 54.4. In particular, 10 CFR 54.4(a)(1)(i) defines as safety-related those SSCs
relied upon to remain functional during and following design basis events to ensure the integrity
of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, the capability to shut down the reactor and maintain it
in a shutdown condition, or the capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents.
Applicants can exclude from license renewal scope packing, gaskets, seals, and O-rings where
these components are clearly not relied upon for a SSC to perform its intended functions. The
applicant is cautioned that there may be instances (such as seals that ensure the pressure
envelope of the control room or structural sealants) where the component may be passive, long-
lived, and necessary for the system to perform its intended function. These components are
included within the license renewal scope and should be subject to an aging management review.
The applicant should include provisions for the discussed consumables so that the conclusions
regarding whether such components are outside the scope of license renewal or are replaced
based on qualified life or specified time period are unambiguous.
2-2

2.2.1 Heat Exchangers
The major pressure-retaining subcomponents of heat exchangers include:
Shell (also known as caseincludes nozzles, covers, manways, and handholes)
Tubes
Coils (may be fined for external flow)
Coil (tube) headers (includes nozzles)
Tubesheets (also known as tubeplates)
Bolting
End flange
Channel head (also known as waterbox, end bell, bonnet or headincludes nozzles, covers,
and a divider (partition) plate(s))
Integral attachments
The component intended functions include pressure boundary and heat transfer (typically
associated with tubes/fins/coils). Additional component information can be found in the Sandia
AMG [4].
2.2.2 Tanks/Vessels
Tanks are normally divided into atmospheric and subatmospheric applications. Vessels are
typically operated above atmospheric pressure. Tanks within the scope of license renewal are
generally located at or above grade; however, they may be located below grade. Pressure-
retaining subcomponents of tanks and vessels include:
Nozzles
Bolted flange and studded connections
Manhole cover plates
Welded joints and weld build-up
Plates and shells
Domes and heads
2-3

2.2.3 Pumps
The pressure-retaining subcomponents of pumps within the scope of license renewal include:
Pump casings
Pump inlets and outlets
Pump covers
Clamping rings
Seal housings, seal glands, and packing glands
Related bolting
Welded joints
2.2.4 Valves
Pressure-retaining portions of valves (including pressure relief valves as defined in ASME
Section III) are subject to aging management review. The pressure boundary subcomponents
include the body, welded joints in the body (if applicable), bonnet (if applicable), and associated
body-to-bonnet bolting (if applicable). Valve disks and stems (as well as adjusting screws and
spring washers in pressure relief valves) are not subject to aging management review, because
they perform an active function and are functionally tested [2].
2.2.5 Piping, Tubing, Fittings, and Branch Connections
The scope includes all pipe, fittings, tubing, branch connections, headers, flanges, integral
attachments, bolting, and welded joints that connect these subcomponents to other mechanical
components.
2.2.6 Miscellaneous Process Components
Miscellaneous process components subject to an aging management review are summarized
below.
Filtersshell, flanged connections, bolting, manway, and housing
Demineralizersshell, nozzles, bolting, manway, and housing (consider as vessel)
Strainersshell, nozzles, and bolting
Flex hoseend flanges, bolting, body, bellows (flex)
Expansion jointend flanges, bolting, body, and bellows
Containment or reactor building spray nozzlesbody, diffuser
2-4

Spargerspipe and nozzles
Flex couplingflanges and bolting
Air ejectorsnozzles, bolting, venturi, and body
Trapsbody, nozzles, and bolting
Flow orificebolting and body
In-line flowmetershell, bolting, and sight glass
Venturishell and bolting
Flow restrictorshell, flanges, and bolting
Cyclone separator (pressure boundary)
Pipe bellows (pressure boundary)
2.3 Materials of Construction
Common materials used in the fabrication of the components listed above include carbon steel,
low-alloy steel, nickel-base alloys, cast iron, copper and copper alloys, and various types of
stainless steels (such as austenitic stainless steels and cast austenitic stainless steels). Typical
material types used to fabricate piping are summarized in Table 2-1. Materials used in
component fabrication may also include titanium and titanium alloys, and aluminum and
aluminum alloys. Additionally, many pressure-retaining parts (sight glasses, HVAC duct seals,
etc.) are fabricated of non-metallics such as glass, PVC (plastic), and neoprene (elastomer).
Table 3-1 of Reference 3 provides a summary of typical materials used for pressure boundary
portions of pumps, and Table 3-3 of Reference 4 provides typical materials of construction for
heat exchangers. It is recommended that the evaluator use the handbook Metals and Alloys in the
Unified Numbering System, published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, to identify
material types (for example, A312 Type 304). However, in many instances, detailed material
specifications may not be required to identify applicable aging effects.
2-5

Table 2-1
Typical Materials of ConstructionPiping
Component
Item
Treated Water Raw Water Air/Gas Fuel/Oil
Pipe (stainless steel)
A 312
Tp 304,316
A 376
Tp 304,304L,316,316L
A 358 Tp 304,316
A 430 FP304
(carbon steel)
A 106 Grade A,B
A 53 Grade A,B
A 134
A 155, Grade C55, Class1
A 155, Grade KC70,
Class1,2
A 672, Grade C70
(carbon steel)
A 106
Grade B, C
A 53 Grade B
A 134
API 5L Grade B
(stainless steel)
A 312
Tp 304,316,316L
SA 376
Tp 304,304L,316
(carbon steel)
A 106 Grade B
A 53, Grade B
A 134
A 155 Grade
KC70, Class1
API 5L Grade B
(stainless steel)
A 312 Tp 304
A 376 Tp 304
ASTM 358,
Class1, Gr304
(carbon steel)
A 106 Grade B
A 53 Grade B
A 134
API 5L Grade B
Fittings (stainless steel)
A 403 WP 304,316,304W
A 182 F 304, 316
(carbon steel)
A 234 WPB,WPC
A 105 Grade I or II
A 216 Grade WPB,WCA,
WCB
(carbon steel)
A 234 WPB
A 105
(stainless steel)
A 403 WP304
A 182 F304
(carbon steel)
A 234 WPB, WPC
A 105
(stainless steel)
A 403 WP304
A 182 F304
(carbon steel)
A 234 WPB
A 105 Grade I or II
Flanges (stainless steel)
A 182 F304,F316
(carbon steel)
A 105 Grade II
A 181 Grade I or II
(carbon steel)
A 105
(stainless steel)
A 182 F 304
(carbon steel)
A 105
A 181 Grade 1
(stainless steel)
A 182 F316
A 182 F304
(carbon steel)
A 181 Grade I or II
A 105

2-6

3
MECHANICAL TOOLSAPPLICABLE AGING
EFFECTS
The aging effects to consider for non-Class 1 mechanical components subject to an aging
management review include loss of material, cracking (initiation and growth), change in material
properties (e.g., reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), and loss of mechanical closure
integrity. These aging effects are consistent with aging effects identified in the B&WOG RCS
Piping Report (BAW-2243A) [2], and the Standard Review Plan for the Review of License
Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (Working Draft September 1997). The
purpose of the Mechanical Tools is to assist the evaluator in the identification of locations within
system evaluation boundaries where aging effects may be a concern for the period of extended
operation. A discussion of each tool is provided in Section 3.1, and the requirements for
implementation of the tools are discussed in Section 3.2.
3.1 Development of Mechanical Tools
Applicable aging effects may be determined based upon consideration of materials of
construction, operating environment, and stress. In most instances, aging effects may be assessed
irrespective of the component type being evaluated. Specifically, different component types
constructed from the same material and located in the same environment will experience similar
aging effects. The material- and environment-based tools are derived from known age-related
degradation mechanisms and operating experience such as NPRDS and NRC generic
communications. In addition, the states of stress (residual or operating) in the mechanical
components are typically not known. It is assumed that operating stresses are within code
allowable in accordance with design requirements, but the component may contain high residual
stresses due to fabrication, field installation, and field welding. This approach results in a
conservative set of material- and environment-based tools when assessing applicable aging
effects.
To facilitate the component evaluation process, mechanical systems within the scope of license
renewal may be grouped within the following internal environments: treated water, raw water,
lube and fuel oil, and gas. Mechanical Tools, which include a set of material and environment-
based tools to determine aging effects, are prepared for each internal environment as discussed in
Sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.4. A separate Mechanical Tool was developed to address degradation
of external surfaces of mechanical components, because external environments, in some
instances, can cause degradation. The External Surface Tool is discussed in Section 3.1.5.
3-1

Mechanical ToolsApplicable Aging Effects
A tool was prepared to identify aging effects for bolted closures. Gaskets are discussed in
Section 2.2. The remaining portions of the bolted closure, i.e., mating surface and associated
bolts, studs, nuts, washers, and bushings, are subject to aging management review. The Bolted
Closure Tool is discussed in Section 3.1.6.
In addition to the environment-based tools discussed above, a component tool was prepared for
heat exchangers because they are typically exposed to multiple environmentsfor example, the
shell side exposed to raw water and the tube side exposed to borated water. The heat exchanger
tool makes extensive use of the Heat Exchanger AMG prepared by Sandia National Laboratories
[4] and is discussed in Section 3.1.7.
Fatigue evaluations for non-Class 1 mechanical components are addressed in the Fatigue Tool.
This tool may eventually be integrated with the other tools. At present, the Fatigue Tool
addresses thermal fatigue induced cracking of mechanical components in accordance with the
requirements of the TLAAs of the components identified in the IPA and is discussed in
Section 3.1.8.
In addition, it is acknowledged that fabrication flaws that were within acceptable limits of the
design code, may exist in the base metal and/or weld metal of non-Class 1 mechanical
components. Although flaw growth is an applicable aging effect, fabrication flaws are by
definition plant specific and time-limited. The tools cannot be used to identify whether a given
plant has fabrication flaws. This plant-specific activity may be performed as part of the
evaluation of time-limited aging analyses for license renewal. Additionally, fabrication flaw
growth is managed by the inspection requirements for Class 2 components in accordance with
ASME Section XI, Subsection IWC, and for Class 3 components in accordance with ASME
Section XI, Subsection IWD. Fabrication flaw growth within components that are not Class 2
or 3 is not a concern for the period of extended operation, because these components are
typically not subjected to operating conditions that could result in a defect.
3.1.1 Treated Water (Appendix A)
All treated water for clean systems starts as demineralized water. Treated water can be further
processed (deionized, deaerated), include corrosion inhibitors, biocides, and boric acid, or
include some combinations of these treatments. At present, the Treated Water Tool addresses the
following environments: borated water, feedwater, main steam (including two-phase fluid),
demineralized water, domestic water, intermediate/closed cooling water, and emergency
feedwater. Aging effects for materials typically found in these environments are summarized in
each of the separate sections of the Treated Water Tool in Appendix A.
Typical systems that contain treated water in PWR plants include High Pressure Injection, Low
Pressure Injection/Decay Heat Removal, Core Flood, Reactor Building Spray, Makeup and
Purification, Chemical Addition, Spent Fuel Cooling, Condensate, Emergency Feedwater, Main
Steam/Feed, Diesel Jacket Cooling, and Intermediate Cooling.
3-2

Typical systems that contain treated water in BWR plants include Main Steam, Feedwater,
Condensate, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling, RHR/Low Pressure Injection, High Pressure
Coolant Injection, Low Pressure Core Spray, High Pressure Core Spray, Standby Liquid Control,
Containment Spray, Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water, Isolation Condenser, Nuclear
Steam Supply Shutoff, Reactor Pressure Relief, Condensate Storage, Containment Atmospheric
Cooling, and Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup.
3.1.2 Raw Water (Appendix B)
Raw water is defined as water that enters a plant from a river, lake, pond, well, ocean, or bay and
that has not been demineralized. In general, the water has been rough-filtered to remove large
particles and may contain a biocidal additive for control of microorganisms, zebra mussels, and
Asiatic clams. Sodium chloride content is below 1000 mg/l for fresh water, above that for
brackish water and saltwater. Raw water is typically used for the Condenser Circulating Water
system and the Nuclear Grade Service Water system. Aging effects for materials typically found
in these environments are summarized in Appendix B.
Typical systems that contain raw water in PWR plants include Low Pressure Service Water,
High Pressure Service Water, Auxiliary Service Water, Reactor Building Cooling, Condenser
Circulating Water, and Fire Protection.
Typical systems that contain raw water in BWR plants include Essential Service Water, Diesel
Cooling Water, Circulating Water, Emergency Power Cooling Water, Emergency Service Water
Spray Pond, Emergency Service Water, RHR Service Water, Service Water, and Fire Protection.
3.1.3 Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil (Appendix C)
Fuel oil is defined as diesel oil, no. 2 oil, or other liquid hydrocarbons used to fuel diesel
engines [3]. Fuel oil may be treated with a biocide for the control of microorganisms.
Lubricating oil is defined as low to medium viscosity hydrocarbons used for bearing, gear,
and engine lubrication [3].
Typical systems that contain lubricating oil and/or fuel oil in PWR plants include Diesel (lube oil
and fuel oil), Safe Shutdown Diesel (lube oil and fuel oil), and Station Blackout Diesel (lube oil
and fuel oil).
Typical systems that contain lubricating oil and/or fuel oil at BWR plants include Emergency
Power Diesel Fuel Oil, High Pressure Core Spray Diesel Fuel Oil, Emergency Diesel Lube Oil,
High Pressure Core Spray Diesel Lube Oil, Lube Oil, and Hydrogen Seal Oil.
3.1.4 Air/Gas (Appendix D)
The air and gas environments within the scope of license renewal include atmospheric air,
ventilation (filtered and unfiltered), instrument air, and compressed gases (CO
2
, H
2
, Halon,
refrigerants, and nitrogen).
3-3

Typical systems that contain a gas environment in PWR plants include Breathing Air, Chemical
Addition, Gaseous Waste, Instrument Air, Leak Rate, Nitrogen Purge and Blanket, Reactor
Building Cooling, Penetration Room Ventilation, Reactor Building Purge, Vacuum, Diesel Air
Intake and Exhaust, and Diesel Air Start.
Typical systems that contain a gas environment in BWR plants include H
2
/O
2
Analyzers,
Standby Gas Treatment, Secondary Containment, Combustible Gas Control, Emergency Diesel
Starting Air, Off Gas Holdup, Off Gas Recombiner, Instrument Air, Alternate SRV Nitrogen
Supply, Hydrogen Cooling, Diesel Generator Building HVAC, Emergency Service Water
Pumphouse Ventilation, and Safety Related Chilled Water.
3.1.5 External Surfaces (Appendix E)
The external surface tool addresses degradation of the external surfaces of the components listed
in Section 2.0 (with the exception of bolted closures) for various environmental conditions.
Degradation of external surfaces of bolted closures is addressed in Appendix F.
3.1.6 Bolted Closures (Appendix F)
Bolting applications within the scope of license renewal may be divided into pressure boundary
bolting and structural and component support bolting. Pressure boundary bolting applications,
which are addressed in Appendix F, include bolted flange connections for vessels (i.e., manways
and handholes), flanged joints in piping, body-to-bonnet joints in valves, and pressure retaining
bolting associated with pumps and miscellaneous process components; these bolted joints are
hereafter referred to as bolted closures. Structural and component support bolting is not
addressed in Appendix F. A bolted closure includes the entire bolted joint, e.g., seating surfaces,
flange set surfaces, and pressure retaining bolting. Aging management programs required to
ensure bolted closure integrity will be addressed on a plant-specific basis using general
recommendations provided in Section 4.0 of Appendix F.
3.1.7 Heat Exchangers (Appendix G)
Appendix G contains the heat exchanger tool. Extensive use is made of the AMG on heat
exchangers [4]; however, in some instances the GLRP found the AMG to be extremely
conservative in its evaluation of some aging effects. Appendix G provides guidance on the use of
the AMG for license renewal applications.
The AMG evaluates a specific set of PWR and BWR heat exchangers considered to be within the
scope of license renewal. See Appendix G for a listing of those heat exchangers.
3-4

3.1.8 Fatigue (Appendix H)
The non-Class 1 fatigue screening tool provides a logic and methodology by which mechanical
systems within the scope of license renewal may be evaluated to determine components
susceptible to cracking from thermal fatigue. The Fatigue Tool is discussed in Appendix H.
3.2 Utilization of Mechanical Tools
NUREG-1800, Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear
Power Plants (SRP-LR) [7] provides the NRCs expectations for the evaluation of plant
systems, structures, and components for license renewal. NEI 95-10 [1] provides further industry
guidance on the implementation of 10 CFR 54, the license renewal rule.
With respect to the determination of aging effects, Appendix A.1.2.1, Branch Technical
Position Applicable Aging Effects, of NUREG-1800 [7] clarifies that both degradations that
have occurred and those that potentially could cause degradation based on materials,
environment, stresses, service conditions, and operating experience should be considered. The
effects of aging on the intended function(s) of structures and components should also be
considered. In addition, the branch technical position indicates that aging effects should be
identified as applicable even if there is a prevention or mitigation program associated with a
given effect (so that the adequacy of the corresponding program is also included in license
renewal evaluations), and that specific identification of aging mechanisms is not required.
When evaluating structures and components within a system, the boundary of the system should
be determined in accordance with the current licensing basis (CLB) and the defined system
intended functions. Evaluation boundaries may be established using intended system functions in
combination with documents such as flow diagrams, piping and instrumentation diagrams
(P&IDs), system descriptions, and design basis documents.
The evaluator must determine the operating modes of the system. Operating mode data should
include operating pressures, operating temperatures, and system flowrates for all modes of
operation. Assessment of current data and projection of operating mode data into the period of
extended operation is recommended. The operating mode data define the environment and
stresses that contribute to the aging of the passive mechanical components within the system.
A correct definition of the environments and stresses is an integral part in the use of these tools
and in the evaluation of structures and components for license renewal. As such, plant-specific
operating experience should be considered during the evaluation that would, for example, serve
to identify locations susceptible to condensation, pooling and concentration of contaminants,
moisture intrusion to a dry air system, etc. Consideration of the related operating experience can
refine evaluator assumptions about an environment and focus the evaluation to known problem
areas and conditions, whereas the conclusions would otherwise agree with the logic of the tool.
The normal aging environment and stresses that the components experience should be evaluated;
this includes conditions observed during normal and upset conditions (e.g., ASME Service Level
A&B). Emergency and faulted conditions (e.g., ASME Service Level C&D) do not constitute the
normal aging environment and stresses for the mechanical components, and the determination of
3-5

applicable aging effects should not be based on these conditions. As discussed in Section 3.0 of
Reference 2, aging management for combinations of aging effects that result from regularly
experienced conditions (i.e., normal and upset conditions) will ensure that the components can
maintain their design requirements in the period of extended operation. Each operating mode
should be evaluated using the tools contained in the appendices to determine the full set of
applicable aging effects. Furthermore, a full set of applicable aging effects is best obtained by the
identification of an aging effect regardless of whether a prevention or mitigation program, such
as water chemistry or a protective coating, is in place for the corresponding aging effect. Any
plant program or activity credited with the prevention or mitigation of an aging effect should be
evaluated (outside the scope of these tools), as described in Section 4.0, to demonstrate
effectiveness.

3-6

4
DEMONSTRATION OF AGING MANAGEMENT
The demonstration of aging management to provide reasonable assurance that the component
intended function will be maintained in the period of extended operation will be determined on a
plant-specific basis. The Mechanical Tools can be used to identify applicable aging effects that
must be managed. Applicants will be responsible for the documentation required to show that
aging is managed by existing plant programs and/or additional actions. The documentation is
plant-specific. The requirements for demonstrating effective aging management are discussed in
Section 4.1.
4.1 Requirements for Demonstration of Aging Management
The criteria for demonstrating that the effects of aging are managed are presented in Section
4.2.1.2 of NEI 95-10 [1] and are not repeated here. The final safety evaluation report (SER)
published by the NRC concerning the RCS Piping Report [2] provides an example of
demonstration of aging management. In addition, SERs of license renewal submittals provide
examples of a demonstration of aging management for non-class 1 mechanical components
applicable to these Mechanical Tools. Also, the Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report
[6] can be used as a resource and is discussed further in Section 5.0.
It is expected that in most instances existing programs will be found to adequately manage the
applicable aging effects [8 (Abstract)]. However, for instances where existing programs do not
fully assure the management of these aging effects during the period of extended operation,
additional actions may be required.
4.2 FSAR Supplement
Once completed with each system evaluation, a summary of the program elements and
commitments credited for aging management must be prepared. This information will be
included in the license renewal applicants FSAR supplement. In addition, commitments for
additional actions will be captured in the FSAR supplement.

4-1

5
GALL COMPARISON
The Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report, NUREG-1801 [6 and 8], is a two-volume
document that contains the NRC staffs generic evaluation of existing plant programs and
provides the technical basis for determining whether existing programs are adequate without
modification and where existing programs should be augmented for the period of extended
operation. The GALL report is referenced as a technical basis for NUREG-1800, Standard
Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (SRP-LR)
[7], which provides guidance to the NRC staff for the review of license renewal applications.
The GALL report is one (but not the only) acceptable way to manage the effects of aging for the
period of extended operation. Use of the GALL report is not required, but is expected to facilitate
the timely, uniform review of a license renewal application by the NRC staff, and (to some
extent) the preparation of the license renewal application [6].
As described in Section 4.0, the demonstration that aging effects are managed is a plant-specific
responsibility. The GALL report, particularly the information contained in Chapter XI, Aging
Management Programs (AMPs), of Volume 2, may be used in this plant-specific demonstration
that is outside the scope of these Mechanical Tools. However, as part of the basis for the NRC
staff determinations related to aging management during the period of extended operation,
Volume 2 of the GALL report includes the NRC staffs generic aging management reviews
(AMR) that are based on experience gained from numerous NRC staff reviews of license
renewal applications and other insights identified by the industry [8]. Similar to the Mechanical
Tools, these generic aging management reviews describe aging effects (and associated
mechanisms) that require management during the period of extended operation based on the
material of construction and the environment to which it is exposed.
The majority of the chapters in Volume 2 of the GALL report contain summary descriptions and
tabulations of generic aging management reviews for a large number of components in the
various major plant systems in light water reactor nuclear power plants. The major plant systems
(system groupings) include the containment structures (Chapter II); structures and component
supports (Chapter III); reactor vessel, internals, and reactor coolant system (Chapter IV);
engineered safety features (Chapter V); auxiliary systems (Chapter VII); and steam and power
conversion system (Chapter VIII). Also, Chapter IX of the GALL report, Volume 2, contains
definitions of standard terms used within the GALL report for the various components, materials,
environments, and aging effects/mechanisms [8]. Volume 2 information is summarized in
Volume 1 of the GALL report, including the relationships of these items to items addressed in
NUREG-1800.
With certain exceptions, the tabulations of aging effects requiring management in Chapters IV,
V, VII, and VIII of the GALL report, Volume 2, are compared for similarity to the applicable
5-1

GALL Comparison
aging effects described in these Mechanical Tools. The portions of the GALL Chapter IV
tabulations that are specific to Class 1 mechanical components or considerations are not
evaluated. The summary table of aging effect/mechanism criteria presented at the end of each
appendix of this technical report is cross-referenced to the respective GALL report, NUREG-
1801 Volume 2, item numbers. Information contained in the summary table is described in
Table 5-1.
Table 5-1
Organization of the GALL Comparison Aging Effects Summary Tables
Column Heading Description
Material Lists the material(s) of construction for an item. (References Section 2.1
and the GALL Comparison discussion for each Appendix.)
Aging
Effect/Mechanism
Lists the applicable aging effect/mechanism for an item. (References
Section 3 and the GALL Comparison discussion for each Appendix.)
Mechanism
Applicability Criteria
Provides criteria for a mechanism to be applicable to a material in the
respective environment (e.g., to require management).
NUREG-1801
(GALL) Item No.
Lists the chapter-specific GALL item numbers (e.g., VIII.B1-1) that
correspond to that material/environment and aging effect combination.
Corresponding GALL item numbers are listed sequentially by chapter,
system, and system-specific item number. The items for a given chapter
are separated from items for other chapters.
None denotes that there were no GALL items identified for the particular
material/environment/aging effect combination.
Tools vs. GALL
Match
The Mechanical Tools examine aging effects and mechanism
applicability; the GALL provides aging management program
recommendations for a given aging effect.
Yes denotes that both the Mechanical Tools and the GALL recognize
the aging effect/mechanism(s) as being applicable for that
material/environment combination (requiring management in GALL).
No denotes the evaluated conclusion of the aging effect/mechanism in
the Mechanical Tools differs from the GALLs recommendation, or that the
GALL does not list the aging effect/mechanism evaluated in the tool.
Relevant Sections,
Assumptions, and
Discussion
References the applicable section, and any assumptions associated with
a material and applicable aging effect/mechanism for a given
environment, and describes variations with the GALL report.

5-2

GALL Comparison
The tabulated generic aging management review results in Volume 2 of the GALL report also
address the chapter-specific numbering of items, but these numbers lack any specified flow or
order and it is the unique identifiers (e.g., VIII.B1-1) that lend to a system-by-system evaluation.
The GALL report also includes a link or links to item numbers in the previous revision of the
GALL that are not relevant to information in these Mechanical Tools.
Additionally, the tabulated GALL items are applied to particular components, whereas particular
components are not addressed in these Mechanical Tools. Any component information that is
pertinent to the comparison is described in the GALL comparison text or in the Relevant
Sections, Assumptions, and Discussion section of the table. Another difference between the
GALL and these Mechanical Tools is that a GALL item may list multiple mechanisms for an
aging effect, while the Mechanical Tool items are mechanism specific. Also, the GALL report
does not include the detailed mechanism applicability criteria provided in this technical report
but does, in some cases, describe certain (but not all) of these criteria in the definition of the
environment.

5-3

6
REFERENCES
1. Industry Guideline for Implementing the Requirements of 10 CFR Part 54 The License
Renewal Rule, NEI 95-10, Revision 6, July 2005.
2. G. Robison, E. Grubbs, M. Rinckel, and R. Starkey, Demonstration of the Management of
Aging Effects for the Reactor Coolant System Piping, BAW-2243A, Framatome ANP,
Lynchburg, VA, June 1996.
3. Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants Pumps, Contractor
Report No. SAND93-7045, Sandia National Laboratories, 1994.
4. Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants Heat Exchangers,
SAND93-7070, prepared by MDC-Ogden Environmental and Energy Services under contract
to Sandia National Laboratories for the U.S. Department of Energy, June 1994.
5. C.I. Grimes, Consumables, License Renewal Issue No. 98-0012, United States Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, April 20, 1999.
6. NUREG-1801, Vol. 1, Rev. 1, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report
Summary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, published September 2005.
7. NUREG-1800, Rev. 1, Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications
for Nuclear Power Plants (SRP-LR), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, published
September 2005.
8. NUREG-1801, Vol. 2, Rev. 1, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report
Tabulation of Results, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, published September 2005.

6-1
Appendix A - Treated Water

processed (deionized, deaerated), include corrosion inhibitors, biocides, and boric acid, or include
some combinations of these treatments. Treated water may be divided into the following sub-
environments: borated water, main feedwater/steam, intermediate or closed cooling water,
emergency feedwater, containment spray, core spray, low and high pressure injection, and
condensate. Stainless steels are predominantly used in systems containing borated water, although
nickel-base alloys, titanium, and titanium alloys may also be used. The remaining treated water
systems may contain stainless steel, carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and copper alloys
(brass, bronze, copper-nickel), aluminum and aluminum alloys, nickel-base alloys, titanium and
titanium alloys, and non-metals such as glass, plastics, and elastomers.

Treated Water-Appendix A i
CONTENTS

Page
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1-1
2. MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENT.............................................................. 2-1
2.1 Materials............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 Stainless Steels..................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Nickel-Base Alloys.............................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.3 Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels ............................................................................. 2-3
2.1.4 Cast Iron and Cast Iron Alloys ............................................................................ 2-3
2.1.5 Copper and Copper Alloys .................................................................................. 2-5
2.1.6 Titanium and Titanium Alloys............................................................................. 2-7
2.1.7 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys ....................................................................... 2-7
2.1.8 Non-Metals .......................................................................................................... 2-8
2.1.9 Protective Coatings.............................................................................................. 2-9
2.2 Environment..................................................................................................... 2-10
2.2.1 PWR Water Chemistry ...................................................................................... 2-11
2.2.2 BWR Water Chemistry...................................................................................... 2-14
3. AGING EFFECTS............................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 Loss of Material ................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1.1 General Corrosion................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1.2 Selective Leaching............................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.3 Galvanic Corrosion.............................................................................................. 3-3
3.1.4 Crevice Corrosion................................................................................................ 3-4
3.1.5 Pitting Corrosion.................................................................................................. 3-5
3.1.6 Erosion and Flow-Accelerated Corrosion ........................................................... 3-6
3.1.7 MIC...................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.1.8 Wear and Fretting ................................................................................................ 3-9
3.1.8.1 Wear................................................................................................................... 3-10
3.1.8.2 Fretting............................................................................................................... 3-10
3.1.9 Caustic Corrosion .............................................................................................. 3-10
3.2 Cracking ........................................................................................................... 3-11
3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage ............................................................................................. 3-11
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking ................................................................................. 3-12
3.2.3 Caustic Cracking................................................................................................ 3-17
3.2.4 Fatigue ............................................................................................................... 3-17
3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness .................................................................. 3-18
3.3.1 Thermal Aging................................................................................................... 3-18
3.3.2 Radiation Embrittlement.................................................................................... 3-19
3.3.3 Hydrogen Embrittlement ................................................................................... 3-19
3.3.4 Caustic Embrittlement ....................................................................................... 3-19
3.4 Distortion.......................................................................................................... 3-19
3.5 Fouling (Flow Restriction/Reduction of Heat Transfer).............................. 3-19
Treated Water-Appendix A ii
3.6 Change in Material Properties/Cracking Non-Metals .............................. 3-20
3.6.1 Glass .................................................................................................................. 3-20
3.6.2 Plastics (Thermoplastics)................................................................................... 3-21
3.6.3 Elastomers.......................................................................................................... 3-22
3.7 Operating History............................................................................................ 3-22
3.7.1 NPRDS / EPIX Review..................................................................................... 3-22
3.7.1.1 PWR NPRDS / EPIX Data ................................................................................ 3-24
3.7.1.2 BWR NPRDS / EPIX Data................................................................................ 3-26
3.7.2 NRC Generic Communications ......................................................................... 3-27
3.8 Summary of Potential Aging Effects.............................................................. 3-39
4. FLOW DIAGRAM AND SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT ............. 4-1
4.1 Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Overview............................................................................................................. 4-3
4.3 Tool Description................................................................................................. 4-3
4.4 GALL Comparison............................................................................................ 4-4
5. REFERENCES................................................................................................... 5-1
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1 Treated Water / Stainless Steel and Nickel-Base Alloys............................... 4-24
Figure 2 Treated Water / Titanium and Titanium Alloys............................................. 4-25
Figure 3 Treated Water / Steam / Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron........ 4-26
Figure 4 Treated Water / Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys........................................................................................... 4-27

Treated Water-Appendix A iii
Treated Water-Appendix A iv
LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 2-1 PWR Feedwater/Main Steam Water Chemistry........................................... 2-12
Table 2-2 PWR Makeup Water Chemistry................................................................... 2-12
Table 2-3 PWR Auxiliary Feedwater Water Chemistry............................................... 2-13
Table 2-4 PWR Intermediate Cooling Water Chemistry.............................................. 2-13
Table 2-5 BWR Feedwater/Condensate ....................................................................... 2-14
Table 2-6 BWR Reactor Water..................................................................................... 2-15
Table 2-7 BWR Control Rod Drive Water ................................................................... 2-15
Table 2-8 SCC Mitigation Alternatives........................................................................ 2-16
Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for PWR Systems ................................... 3-24
Table 3-2 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for BWR Systems................................... 3-26
Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloys, and
Titanium and Titanium Alloys....................................................................... 4-7
Table 4-2 Aging Effects Summary - Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron... 4-13
Table 4-3 Aging Effects Summary - Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum
and Aluminum Alloys.................................................................................. 4-18

1. INTRODUCTION

The Treated Water Tool is a methodology that identifies applicable aging effects for materials
subjected to a treated water environment. Treated water environments include liquid water, steam,
and two-phase flow. The Treated Water Tool may be applied to the following components: pipe,
tubing, fittings, tanks, vessels, valve bodies and bonnets, pump casings, and miscellaneous process
components. Applicable aging effects include cracking, loss of material, change in material
properties (e.g., reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), fouling, and loss of mechanical closure
integrity.

Loss of mechanical closure integrity is not addressed in the Treated Water Tool, but is treated
separately in Appendix F. Aging effects of materials exposed to external environments, such as
humid air, that are not continuously wetted or in a splash zone are addressed in Appendix E. Aging
effects for materials exposed to water that has not been demineralized (e.g., water from open/natural
sources) or to treated water that has become chemically contaminated (e.g., drainage, waste
processing) are addressed in Appendix B. Evaluation of heat exchangers is performed with the tool
contained in Appendix G. Evaluation of thermal fatigue cracking is addressed in Appendix H.

This tool primarily addresses the combination of material and internal environment (process media
that is contained) but can also be used to evaluate the combination of material and external
environment for components that are submerged in a tank or pool, such as the suppression pool
(BWR) or spent fuel pool. The materials and environments covered in the Treated Water Tool are
discussed in Section 2.0. Aging effects that apply to the material and environment combinations are
discussed in Section 3.0. Section 4.0 presents the development of the evaluation flowchart(s) and
aging effects summary tables.

It is important to note that fluorides are not mentioned within the EPRI BWR Water Chemistry
Guidelines [30]. Further discussions with BWR Water Chemistry Manual Guidelines committee
members revealed that fluoride is simply not prevalent at BWR plants. However, BWR plants that
use municipal water as a source for treated water makeup may be an exception that would need to be
evaluated on a plant-specific basis. Therefore, all fluoride thresholds provided are applicable to
PWR plants, but may also apply in some cases to BWR plants that use municipal water for makeup
of treated water systems.

Thresholds for oxygen, chlorides, fluorides, and sulfates are provided for information. Aging effects
shown as not a concern based on water chemistry are considered applicable aging effects that
require management so that aging management programs, such as the chemistry program, are not
implicitly credited by users of this tool but are evaluated for demonstration of aging management as
discussed in Section 4 of the implementation guideline.

Treated Water-Appendix A 1-1
2. MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENT

The Treated Water Tool will assist the evaluator in determining locations within systems containing
treated water that may be susceptible to one or more of the following aging effects: cracking, loss of
material, change in material properties (e.g., reduction of fracture toughness), or distortion. The
term treated water comprises liquid water, steam, and two-phased flow environments. The
materials addressed in this tool are discussed in Section 2.1 and the nuclear plant treated water
environments are further described in Section 2.2.

2.1 Materials

The following materials are addressed in this tool: (1) wrought and cast stainless steels (including
weld metals and cladding), (2) nickel-base alloys (including nickel-base alloy weld metal), (3)
carbon and low-alloy steels (including weld metals), (4) cast irons, (5) copper and copper alloys
(brass, bronze, copper-nickel), (6) titanium and titanium alloys, (7) aluminum and aluminum alloys,
(8) non-metals, and (9) protective coatings (e.g., plasite).

2.1.1 Stainless Steels

The stainless steels are divided into the following categories: (1) wrought stainless steels, (2) cast
stainless steels, (3) weld metals, and (4) stainless steel cladding. Each category is discussed below.

Wrought Stainless Steels
Wrought stainless steels comprise five groups: (1) austenitic, (2) ferritic, (3) martensitic,
(4) precipitation hardening, and (5) duplex stainless steels. Definitions of the groups of stainless
steels are provided in Reference 1 and are not repeated here. From a review of systems that contain
treated water within the scope of license renewal, wrought austenitic materials (Type 300 series) are
predominantly used for piping, tubing, selected valve bodies and bonnets, and selected tanks and
vessels. Ferritic stainless steels are not typically used in treated water systems, and are not
evaluated in this tool. Martensitic and precipitation hardening stainless steels are typically used for
bolting, valve stems, and pump shafts, and are not evaluated in this tool. [Note: valve stems and
pump shafts are not subject to aging management review in accordance with the discussion in
Section 2.0 of the main document.] Bolted closures are addressed in Appendix F.

Cast Stainless Steels
The cast stainless steels addressed in the Treated Water Tool all contain ferrite in an austenitic
matrix (i.e., CF series) and are commonly known as cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS). Alloys
used in nuclear applications include CF-8 (and CF-8A), CF-8M, CF-3, and CF-3M, which are cast
counterparts of wrought Types 304, 316, 304L, and 316L, respectively. Alloys CF-3M and CF-8M
are modifications of CF-3 and CF-8 containing 2% to 3% molybdenum and slightly higher nickel to
enhance resistance to corrosion and pitting. However, molybdenum increases the susceptibility to
long-term thermal embrittlement at operating temperatures greater than 400F.

Stainless Steel Weld Metal
The welding materials used to join stainless steels are dependent upon the type of material being
joined. For example, Type 304 wrought austenitic stainless steels may be joined using either gas
metal-arc welding (GMAW), submerged-arc welding (SAW), or shielded metal-arc welding
(SMAW) processes with a Type 308 electrode or welding rod. The various welding processes used
to join wrought stainless steels in treated water systems include SMAW, SAW, GMAW, gas
tungsten-arc welding (GTAW), and plasma-arc welding (PAW). Flux core arc welding (FCAW)
may have been used but to a lesser extent. Cast stainless steel welding processes typically used
include SMAW, GTAW, GMAW, and electroslag welding [1].

In general, weld metals are more resistant to cracking by SCC than wrought stainless steel and are
more like CASS from that perspective. However, it should be noted that strength and toughness of
selected stainless steel weld metals used to join wrought stainless steels were shown to vary
depending upon the welding process used [2]. For example, flux welds, such as SAW and SMAW,
were shown to provide joint properties with higher strength and significantly lower toughness than
the surrounding base metal. Higher strength of the weld metal results in enhanced load bearing
capacity compared to base metal; lower toughness of the weld metal may result in a reduced ability
to support structural loads if the weld metal cracks. The strength and toughness of nonflux welds,
such as GMAW and GTAW, were shown to be similar to the surrounding base metal.

Stainless Steel Cladding Material
Stainless steel cladding exposed to non-Class 1 treated water environments within the scope of
license renewal is typically austenitic stainless steel. Cladding may take the form of weld deposit or
stainless steel plate that is either explosively applied or rolled onto carbon or low-alloy structural
steel. A detailed description of weld deposit cladding is provided in Section 3.0 of Reference 4.
The cladding is assumed to be equivalent to the wrought austenitic stainless steels with respect to
the discussions of loss of material and resistance to cracking in Section 3.0.

2.1.2 Nickel-Base Alloys

The nickel-base alloys that are typically used for nuclear applications are Alloy 600 and Alloy 690.
These materials are used primarily for their oxidation resistance and strength at elevated
temperatures. The applications are typically restricted to the reactor coolant system (e.g., reactor
vessel CRDM nozzles), but may also be found in selected non-Class 1 components such as the Core
Flood Tanks. In addition, Alloy 600 may also be used in fasteners, which are discussed in Appendix
F. Other nickel-base alloy materials such as nickel-copper and nickel-copper-molybdenum alloys
are not evaluated in this tool.

Welding of nickel-chromium-iron alloys is typically performed using arc-welding processes such as
GTAW, SMAW, and GMAW [1]. Submerged arc welding may also be used provided the welding
flux is carefully selected. Alloy 82 and Alloy 182 are typical filler metals used to join Alloy 600
components to carbon or low-alloy steel vessels. Alloys 82 and 182 are also used as cladding in
selected components within the reactor coolant system. In addition, Alloy 52 and Alloy 152 are
typical filler metals used to join Alloy 690 components to carbon or alloy steel vessels in the reactor
coolant system.
2.1.3 Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels

Carbon steels are unalloyed except for specified amounts of carbon. In addition, carbon steel may
contain small amounts of manganese, phosphorus, silicon, and sulfur. Carbon steels typically used
in non-Class 1 applications include, but are not limited to, ASTM A105 Grade I or II, ASTM A 106
Grade B, ASTM A181, and ASTM A234 Grade WPB. Differentiation between wrought and cast
product forms is not required.

Low-alloy steels contain small amounts of alloying elements such as nickel, chromium,
molybdenum, and manganese, which enable them to be hardened by quench and temper heat
treatment. They are generally used for Class 1 components but may be found in some non-Class 1
applications such as bolting, which is addressed in Appendix F. Typical examples include ASTM A
508 and ASTM A 533. Differentiation between wrought and cast product forms is not required.

In general, carbon and low-alloy (ferritic) steels may be joined using various arc welding processes,
for example, FCAW, GMAW, GTAW, PAW, SAW, and SMAW. All weld filler metals used in
welding carbon and low-alloy steels are assumed to be equivalent to the carbon and low-alloy base
metal with respect to the discussions of loss of material, reduction in fracture toughness, distortion,
and resistance to cracking (initiation) in Section 3.0.

2.1.4 Cast Iron and Cast Iron Alloys

The term cast iron is a generic term for a large family of cast ferrous alloys in which the carbon
content exceeds the solubility of carbon in austenite at the eutectic temperature [1]. A majority of
the cast irons of interest contain a minimum of 2% carbon with sulfur and silicon elements added
depending on the specific properties desired. Other alloying elements, such as chromium, copper or
nickel, are used where high corrosion resistance, hardness, or other mechanical properties are
desired. The common forms of cast iron encountered are white cast iron, gray cast iron, malleable
cast iron, and ductile or nodular cast iron. In many cases the word cast is often left out, resulting
in white iron, gray iron, malleable iron, and ductile iron, respectively [7].

White Cast Iron
This category of cast iron is so named because of the characteristically white fracture surfaces,
which occur due to the lack of any graphite in their microstructures. Carbon is present in the form
of carbides. These cast irons are hard, brittle, and have high compressive strength with good
retention of strength and hardness at elevated temperatures. The hardness of this form of iron results
in a high resistance to wear and abrasion; therefore, these irons are used primarily where there is a
need for resistance to wear and abrasion [1].

Gray Cast Iron
This form of cast iron is the most common of the iron alloys in nuclear plants. It is most commonly
found in raw water systems (particularly in fire suppression water systems) although some treated
water applications may exist. In these iron alloys, the carbon is above the solubility limit of
austenite at the eutectic temperature [1]. During cooling and solidification, a substantial portion of
the carbon content separates out of the liquid and forms flakes of graphite. This material is usually
selected because of the relatively low cost and ease of machining and excellent resistance to wear
[7]. Another attribute of this material is its ability to be cast in thin sections. Gray cast iron alloys
also contain outstanding properties for applications involving vibrational damping or moderate
thermal shock.

Ductile Cast Iron
Ductile cast iron is commonly known as nodular or spheroidal-graphite iron. It is similar to gray
iron but with the addition of small amounts of magnesium and/or cerium added to the molten iron in
a process called nodulizing. The resultant graphite grows as tiny spheres rather than the flakes in
gray iron due to these additives. The major advantages that these ductile cast irons exhibit when
compared to gray iron are a combination of high strength and ductility, which results from the
graphite spheres [1, 7]. Nickel, chromium, and/or copper can be added to improve material strength
and hardenability properties. Larger amounts of silicon, chromium, nickel, or copper can also be
added for improved resistance to corrosion or for high-temperature applications [7].

Malleable Irons
Malleable iron is white cast iron that is heat treated to form graphite clusters instead of flakes, thus
increasing the ductility of the material. Malleable iron and ductile iron are used in similar
applications where ductility and toughness are required, when cost and availability are the primary
selection criteria.

Compacted Graphite Cast Iron
This type of cast iron is manufactured by very carefully controlling the amount of magnesium added
as an inoculant in a process very similar to the process used to make ductile iron. Impact and fatigue
properties, although not as good as ductile iron, are substantially better than those of gray cast iron.
The combination of high strength and good impact resistance, coupled with a good capacity for heat
dissipation, makes CG irons well suited for applications where neither gray nor ductile iron is
entirely satisfactory [1].

Alloy Cast Irons
Various alloying elements can be added to cast iron to improve corrosion and abrasion resistance,
heat resistance, and mechanical properties. However these alloys are not widely used in the nuclear
industry. The main advantage of using cast iron is the relatively low cost and abundance. When
special material properties are required, it is likely that other materials would be used. A discussion
of some of the most common cast iron alloys is included to provide insight for the occasional
application that may be encountered during plant evaluations.

The most common alloying elements are silicon, chromium, nickel, and copper [1, 7]. High silicon
irons are the most universally corrosion-resistant alloys available at moderate cost. All cast irons
contain up to 3% silicon. Alloys containing 4.5% to 8.0% silicon have been shown to demonstrate
excellent high temperature properties, while a silicon content above 14% yields an alloy that is
extremely resistant to corrosion, particularly in acidic environments [7]. Corrosion resistance can be
increased in white, gray, or nodular iron by adding nickel, chromium, and copper (or a combination
thereof) or silicon in excess of 3% [1]. These alloying elements promote the formation of a strongly
protective surface film under oxidizing conditions (such as exposure to acids). High nickel alloys
containing greater than 12% nickel provide excellent resistance to corrosion and heat. (These high
nickel alloys also contain 1 to 6% chromium and as much as 10% copper, which enhance corrosion
resistant properties). The addition of copper results in better resistance to sulfuric acid and
atmospheric corrosion. The high abrasion resistance and excellent corrosion resistance of high
chromium white irons have resulted in the development of a several alloys containing 20 to 35%
Chromium [1].

These iron alloys as described above are but a few of the many diverse iron alloys available.
However, due to the specialized nature of the alloys, the availability, and the cost, they have a very
limited application at most plants. Descriptions are included above to provide guidance where this
limited application is identified.

2.1.5 Copper and Copper Alloys

Copper metals resist the atmosphere, fresh and salt waters, alkaline solutions (except those
containing ammonia), and many organic chemicals. The resistance to corrosion by oxidizing acids
depends mainly on the severity of oxidizing conditions in the acid solution. Copper metals are
suitable for use with many salt solutions. Although copper and copper-based alloys generally have
high corrosion resistance, copper and brass are very susceptible to erosion corrosion, partially due to
the relative softness of the material [7]. Bronzes, aluminum brass alloys, and copper nickel alloys
containing a small amount of iron demonstrate greater erosion corrosion resistance than other copper
alloys [7].

Brass and bronze products are available in both cast and wrought product forms, with most alloy
compositions available in both. Brasses and bronzes containing tin and lead and/or zinc have only
moderate tensile and yield strengths and high elongation. Aluminum bronzes, manganese bronzes,
and silicon brasses/bronzes are used where higher strength alloys are required. Although copper and
copper alloys have wide use in heat exchangers, their use in some applications is restricted as a
result of the loss of strength and the susceptibility to creep at moderately elevated temperatures [1].
Copper nickel alloys do not experience these effects under such conditions and can be used where
elevated temperatures are encountered.

Because of the large number of copper alloys available and the wide range of mechanical properties
exhibited by some of these specialty materials, it is not possible to include this entire spectrum in the
tool logic. This appendix addresses the most common copper alloys that are present in treated water
systems at both BWR and PWR plants. The copper alloys included in the tool logic are: (1) yellow
brass, (2) commercial bronze, (3) Muntz metal (60 - 40% Cu Ni), and (4) copper nickel alloys (both
90-10 and 70-30 Cu - Ni). Although the focus is on these alloys, other alloys such as aluminum
bronze and silicon bronze have been included where significant aging effects were identified.

Brass, bronze, Muntz metal, and copper nickel result from the addition of other metals (such as tin,
zinc, or nickel) to the base copper material. Most brasses and Muntz metal have zinc and other
elements added to increase corrosion resistance or optimize material properties. Bronze generally is
an alloy of copper and tin. The most commonly used bronze is commercial bronze, a copper/zinc
alloy. Various other elements such as aluminum, silicon, lead, etc., are used with copper to produce
aluminum bronze, silicon bronze, lead bronze, etc. Cupronickel is an alloy containing copper and
nickel.

Copper and its alloys generally exhibit very high resistance to corrosion in the environments
covered by this treated water tool. Copper does, however, react with sulfur or sulfides to form
copper sulfide and should not be used in environments where these contaminants will be present [7].
As in all materials, copper and its alloys are susceptible to various forms of aging effects under
certain conditions. Crevice corrosion and pitting corrosion are generally applicable to all materials
under certain conditions and the copper alloys are no exception. The following discussions include
identification of the specific degradation mechanisms for the various copper alloys.

Yellow Brass
Yellow brass, sometimes referred to as cartridge brass, is a 70% Cu and 30% Zn alloy with
relatively low yield and tensile strength [1, 7]. Although it is typically used in raw water systems
because of its corrosion resistance, it does have limited use in the many treated water systems
covered by this tool. Yellow brass is susceptible to both stress corrosion cracking and selective
leaching under certain environmental and fluid conditions as are most copper alloys with greater
than 15% Zn content [1, 7].

Commercial Bronze
Commercial bronze is a copper-zinc alloy containing 90% Cu and 10% Zn. It is commonly in raw
water systems where higher resistance to corrosion is necessary. However, it is also used in limited
treated water applications. The strength and hardness is lower than yellow brass. The lower zinc
content of this material provides high resistance to stress corrosion cracking and selective
leaching [1, 7].

Muntz Metal
Muntz metal is a copper-zinc alloy containing 60% Cu and 40% Zn. This material has high thermal
conductivity, corrosion resistance, and machinability and is used primarily for heat exchanger tube
sheets. The high zinc content makes this material susceptible to stress corrosion cracking and
selective leaching [1, 7]. Erosion corrosion is also a concern for this material when subjected to
relatively high velocities.

Naval Brass
Naval brass is a copper zinc alloy resulting from the addition of Sn to the basic composition of
Muntz metal. The result is an inhibited alloy containing 60% Cu, 40% Zn, and 0.75% Sn.

Copper Nickel
The majority of copper nickel alloys used in treated water systems in BWRs and PWRs are the 90 -
10% and 70 - 30% copper nickel combinations. These materials are primarily used as heat
exchanger tube material. (Appendix G of these Mechanical Tools addresses heat exchanger
applications in greater detail.) Of all the copper alloys, cupronickel provides the greatest overall
resistance to general corrosion and is highly resistant to stress corrosion cracking and erosion
corrosion [1, 7]. Pitting and crevice corrosion are generally not a concern for copper nickel alloys in
an aqueous environment unless sulfides are present.

2.1.6 Titanium and Titanium Alloys

Titanium alloys were originally developed in the early 1950s for aerospace applications due to their
high strength to density ratios. However, the excellent corrosion resistance properties of titanium,
specifically in chloride containing fluids, have led to widespread use in industrial applications,
including the nuclear industry. The corrosion resistance of titanium is a result of the formation of a
continuous, stable, highly adherent protective oxide layer on the metal surface. The metal itself is
very reactive with a high affinity for oxygen and reforms damage to this layer instantaneously.
However, anhydrous conditions in the absence of a source of oxygen may result in titanium
corrosion [37].

Titanium and its alloys are fully resistant to water, all natural waters, and steam to temperatures in
excess of 315C (600F). Slight weight gain is usually experienced in these benign environments
along with some surface discoloration at higher temperatures. Typical contaminants in water, such
as sulfides, sulfates, and chlorides do not compromise the passivity of titanium from finite passive
film thickening. Titanium alloys exhibit negligible corrosion rates in seawater to temperatures as
high as 260C (500F); passivity is not compromised by the typical contaminants (e.g., iron and
magnesium oxides, sulfides, sulfates, carbonates, and chlorides) encountered [37].

The most commonly used grades of titanium in industrial applications include unalloyed titanium
(ASTM grades 1-4) and alloys comprised of varying amounts of palladium, molybdenum, nickel,
aluminum, and valladium (ATSM grades 7, 12, 9, and 5). Varying the alloy compositions gives
slight differences in corrosion protection from one alloy to another, often at a higher cost. Within
nuclear plants, titanium and titanium alloys are utilized in heat exchanger tubing and piping exposed
to seawater, among other applications.

2.1.7 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys

Aluminum is a reactive metal, but develops a strongly bonded oxide film which gives it excellent
corrosion resistance in many environments. Once damaged, this film reforms immediately. This
film is quite stable in neutral and many acidic solutions but is attacked by alkalies. While pure
aluminum has a relatively low strength, alloying aluminum with materials such as copper, silicon, or
zinc can impart the metal with a broad range of mechanical properties [7]. Aluminum alloys exhibit
negligible action in boric acid solutions [16]. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are not resistant to
high pH environments (for example, NaOH in Reactor Building Spray).

Because of the large number of available aluminum and aluminum alloy metals and the wide range
of mechanical properties exhibited by some of these specialty materials, it is not possible to include
this entire spectrum in the tool logic. There are two major categories of aluminum and aluminum
alloys, wrought (1xxx 9xxx) and cast (1xx.x 9xx.x). However, for the purposes of this tool,
differentiation between wrought and cast product forms is not required. Aluminum in the 1xxx
and 1xx.x series/group is controlled unalloyed (pure) compositions 99.00%. Other aluminum
compositions are aluminum alloys grouped by the major alloying elements. Series 2xxx, 2xx.x,
3xx.x, 7xxx, and 7xx.x aluminum alloys, which include copper, are the least resistant to
corrosion and cracking [37].
2.1.8 Non-Metals

Glass
Glass is an amorphous, inorganic oxide, mostly silica, cooled to a rigid condition without
crystallization. Transparency is utilized for equipment such as flowmeters. Hydrofluoric acid and
caustic attack glass, and it shows a slight attack in hot water. Uniform, selective, or localized attack
can occur. When hot water attacks glass, it is not dissolved in the usual sense; it hydrolytically
decomposes. There are a wide variety of glass compositions with modifiers, fluxes, and stabilizers
added to obtain various properties, including corrosion resistance. Properties are also affected by
thermal history (e.g., heat treatment) [7]. Because most silicate glasses have a high resistance to
corrosion in normal environments, glass per se is frequently considered to be an inert substance.
Silica is almost insoluble in an aqueous environment except at temperatures in excess of 250C
(482F). Acid attack of soda-lime and borosilicate glass compositions is minimal due to the
formation of protective, highly siliceous surface layer, except for hydrofluoric and phosphoric acids
at high temperatures [45].

The major categories of traditional glass include soda-lime glass and borosilicate glass. Soda-lime
glasses are the oldest, lowest cost, and most widely used, because of their transparency. They have
fair to moderate corrosion resistance and are useful at temperatures up to 860F annealed and 480F
in the tempered condition. Glasses containing boric oxide have excellent chemical and temperature
resistance. These borosilicate glasses (e.g., Pyrex) are the most versatile and are used in such
products as sights, gages, and piping. Another category of glass is the aluminosilicates.
Aluminosilicate glasses are roughly 3 times more costly than the borosilicate types, but are useful at
higher temperatures, with a maximum service temperature of 1200F. Corrosion resistance to
weathering, water, and chemicals is excellent (for aluminosilicates), although acid resistance is
comparatively fair [41]. Additionally, heat resistant glass (e.g., 96% silica and fused quartz) is
available and acceptable for high temperature applications, up to 1650F [16, 41].

No definitive instances of glass failure due to an aging effect have been recorded in industry
operating experience searches. Additionally, treated water environments do not contain
hydrofluoric or phosphoric acids and only in limited instances, such as NaOH in Reactor
Building/Containment Spray, do they contain caustics.

Plastics
Non-metal materials such as plastics are also used where temperatures, pressures, and stresses are
not limiting and in media (such as aqueous chloride solutions) which cause localized corrosion in
metals and alloys. While plastics do not dissolve like metals, they do potentially degrade due to
moisture absorption (swelling), loss in mechanical properties, softening, hardening, and
discoloration. When compared to metals and alloys, plastics are weaker, more resistant to chloride
ions, less resistant to oxidizing acids, less resistant to solvents, and have much lower temperature
limitations. A plastic is a material that contains as an essential ingredient an organic substance of
large molecular weight, can be shaped by flow, and is a solid in its finished state. (In common usage,
the words plastic, polymer, and polymeric material are often used interchangeably.) Some
plastics (or polymers) occur in nature, but most are produced synthetically. Plastics are readily
divided into two classes: thermoplastics and thermosets. The thermoplastics soften with increasing
temperature and return to their original hardness when cooled. The thermosets harden when heated
and retain hardness when cooled. Cold flow, or creep at ambient temperatures, is a problem
particularly with the thermoplastics [7]. Thermosets, such as epoxies, phenolics, and resins, are
discussed further in Section 2.1.9 below.

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is a thermoplastic material composed of polymers of vinyl chloride.
Manufactured from sodium chloride (NaCl) and natural gas, PVC is relatively unaffected by water,
concentrated alkalis, and non-oxidizing acids, oils, and ozone. While PVC begins to lose
mechanical rigidity above 140F, it is typically unaffected by sunlight and humidity changes [33].
Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) is a member of the fluorocarbon family of plastics and is a
homopolymer of vinylidene fluoride. Extruded as pipe, it is rigid and resists abrasion, as well as
being chemically resistant, especially to halogens. It is impervious to deionized water which can
cause organic and inorganic particulates to leach from PVC. PVDF is highly corrosion resistant and
can withstand years of in-ground exposure to moisture and chemicals [34].

Unlike metals, thermoplastics do not display corrosion rates. Rather than depending on an oxide
layer for protection, they depend on chemical resistance to the environment to which they are
exposed. The plastic is either completely resistant to the environment or it deteriorates. Therefore,
acceptability for the use of thermoplastics within a treated water environment is a design driven
criterion.

Elastomers
Elastomers are defined as rubber or polymer that has properties similar to those of rubber. They are
used in nuclear plants in various capacities, such as joint sealants, moisture barriers, and flexible
connections. The outstanding characteristic of rubber and elastomers is resilience or low modulus of
elasticity. Flexibility accounts for most applications. However, chemical and abrasion resistance,
and good insulating qualities, result in many corrosion applications. Generally speaking, the natural
rubbers have better mechanical properties than the synthetic or artificial rubbers (e.g., neoprene), but
the synthetics have better corrosion resistance [7]. For example, natural rubbers, butyl rubbers,
nitrile rubbers (Buna N), and Buna S are degraded by ozone and sunlight, whereas synthetic rubbers
are not affected by ozone and are typically much more resistant to sunlight (or other forms of
ultraviolet radiation) [7, 35].

2.1.9 Protective Coatings

Some of the carbon steel vessels and tanks within the scope of license renewal contain organic
protective inner coatings. For example, Plasite is used as an internal coating material for the
Borated Water Storage Tanks at some B&W plants. Plasite is manufactured by Wisconsin
Protective Coating Corporation and is a water resistant phenolic coating cross linked with epoxy
resin and polymerized with an alkaline type curing agent. Other carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and
cast iron applications also can be coated or lined.

Organic Inner Coatings
Cured organic coatings, such as phenolic-resin films, are among the most resistant to water, acids,
alkalis, and solvents of all types that are available. Phenolic-resin coatings have over 30 years of
excellent field history as a lining for tanks containing deionized water with temperatures of 180F to
190F. For example, a Technical Bulletin for Plasite 7155 [6] contains results of a test in a boric
acid solution consisting of 1x 5 mild steel test panels coated with a film thickness of 8 to 10 mils.
The panels were half immersed in a 25% boric acid solution for a period of six months with no
effect on the coating. Blistering and delamination of organic coatings have been reported (Section
3.7); however, root cause evaluations indicate that the failures were attributed to improper
installation and insufficient curing following application of the coating. At present, there are no
reported or known aging degradation mechanisms of organic linings exposed to treated water
environments that could lead to loss of material, cracking, reduction of toughness, or distortion,
assuming the coating was applied in accordance with the manufacturers requirements.

Aging degradation of organic coatings may not be a concern; however, as noted previously, failures
of coatings have occurred (albeit not specifically in treated water systems). These failures are not
necessarily related to aging of the coating. Failures are often caused by poor original installation as
noted in the generic correspondence evaluation for IN 85-024 included in Section 3.7 of this
appendix. The concern resulting from failure of the liner/coating is the effect on the underlying base
material as it contacts the fluid environment. Whether the failure results from improper
maintenance, inadequate installation, or other causes is not important if it does not result in failure
of the base metal pressure boundary function. Since failures have been identified in
linings/coatings, it is incumbent on each plant to assess the adequacy of those linings/coatings
credited with preventing degradation of the base material.

Not all types of coatings and applications can be included in this mechanical tool logic because of
the various types of coatings and the diverse range of applications and environments encountered.
Additionally, protective coatings cannot be credited in the determination of potential aging effects
during Aging Management Review. Therefore, this tool does not take credit for any programmatic
systems (such as protective coatings) in its determination of applicable aging effects for a given
environment. However, where various plant programs or inspections are credited with assuring the
lining/coating integrity, any such programs should be continued through the license renewal period
and included as license renewal effective programs.

Organic Outer Coatings
External protective coatings are not addressed in this tool since external surfaces are covered in
Appendix E.

2.2 Environment

processed (deionized, deaerated) or include corrosion inhibitors, biocides, and boric acid, or include
some combinations of these treatments. In addition, caustic solutions of demineralized water and
sodium hydroxide (NaOH) are utilized at some nuclear power plants for pH control. Treated water
is divided into two categories: borated and non-borated.

PWR systems that contain borated water are typically constructed from stainless steel and include
ECCS systems (i.e., HPI, LPI, and Core Flood), chemical addition system, spent fuel cooling
system, reactor building spray system, and the makeup and letdown systems. Water chemistry
requirements for the PWR reactor coolant system are provided in the EPRI Water Chemistry
Guidelines [3] for all modes of operation. Appendix B of Reference 3 provides recommendations
for chemistry control of the makeup and letdown systems, boric acid storage tank, borated water
(refueling water) storage tank, and spent fuel cooling system. The control parameters for PWR
systems containing borated water (e.g., ECCS) are, in general, similar to those of the PWR Reactor
Coolant System with the exception of dissolved oxygen levels. Portions of the high and low
pressure injection systems and the reactor building spray system take suction from the borated water
storage tank which is not deaerated; similarly, the spent fuel cooling system water is exposed to the
environment and is not scavenged for oxygen. Typically, makeup water for these systems comes
from a demineralized water source (see Table 2-2 below) and the chemical addition system for boric
acid adjustment.

The only BWR system containing borated water is the Standby Liquid Control System. This system
typically uses sodium pentaborate decahydrate as a source of boron, as opposed to the boric acid
(sodium tetraborate) used in PWR borated water systems. The Standby Liquid Control System
typically uses a 13 to 19.6 wt% solution of sodium pentaborate, typically a mixture of Borax and
boric acid with water, which has a pH range of 6.8 8.5 and is relatively benign to the typical
materials in the system and much less aggressive than boric acid when concentrated.

Some of the PWR systems that contain non-borated treated water include main feedwater, main
steam, intermediate or closed cooling systems, makeup water, emergency (auxiliary) feedwater, and
diesel jacket cooling water (typically with an ethylene glycol mix). Similar BWR systems that
contain non-borated treated water include containment spray, high and low pressure core spray, high
and low pressure coolant injection, RHR, condensate, feedwater, main steam, reactor core isolation
cooling, reactor building closed cooling water, isolation condenser, nuclear steam supply shutoff,
control rod drive hydraulic systems, and diesel jacket cooling water systems.

2.2.1 PWR Water Chemistry

The following tables present recommended water chemistry for PWRs [3, 13]. They are included as
generic information only; however, these chemistry limits were consulted when preparing the tool
logic provided in Chapter 4 of this appendix. Each plant should compare specific chemistry limits
when implementing this tool to verify all assumptions included in the logic.

Table 2-1 PWR Feedwater/Main Steam Water Chemistry

PARAMETER
NORMAL
POWER
OPERATION
STARTUP
HOT
STANDBY
STEAMING
AT <15%
FULL POWER
pH @ 77F
a a a a
Hydrazine, ppb 20 20 20 20
Dissolved Oxygen, ppb 5 100 10 5
Sodium, ppb 3 --- --- ---
Chloride, ppb 5 --- --- ---
Corrected
b
Conductivity,
S/cm @ 77F
0.2 1.0 <0.5 <0.5
Silica, ppb 20 20 20 20
Total Iron, ppb <10 100 10 10
Suspended Solids, ppb <10 --- --- ---
Copper, ppb <2 --- --- ---
Sulfate, ppb <10 --- --- ---
a
Dependent on site specific amine program being used.
b
Corrected for organic acids or substitution of calculated value based on sulfate and chloride
content.

Table 2-2 PWR Makeup Water Chemistry

PARAMETER
SYSTEM EFFLUENT OR STORAGE TANK
Conductivity, S/cm @ 77F 1.0
pH @ 77F 6.0 - 8.0
Chloride, ppm 0.1
Fluoride, ppm 0.1
Sulfate, ppm 0.05
*Active Silica, ppm <0.10
*Aluminum, ppm <0.08
*Magnesium, ppm <0.04
*Calcium +Magnesium, ppm <0.08
* Diagnostic Parameters per EPRI Primary Water Chemistry Guidelines [3].

Table 2-3 PWR Auxiliary Feedwater Water Chemistry

PARAMETER CONCENTRATION
pH @ 77F
a
Dissolved Oxygen, ppb OTSG 250F Maintain hydrazine at >3(O
2
) @ STP
Dissolved Oxygen, ppb OTSG 250F 10
Hydrazine, ppb 3(O
2
)
Conductivity, S/cm @ 77F 1.0
a
Dependent on site-specific amine program.

Table 2-4 PWR Intermediate Cooling Water Chemistry

PARAMETER CONCENTRATION
*pH @ 77F 10.0
*Dissolved Solids (including additives), ppm 2,000
Chloride, ppm 1.0
Fluoride, ppm 1.0
*Phosphate as Phosphate, ppm 100 - 300
*Chromate as Chromate, ppm 300 - 500
* FANP main recommended treatment. Systems using other chemical control additives will
have different control parameters.

Water chemistry of the main feedwater/steam system is closely monitored to minimize the potential
for degradation of the steam generators. The addition of amines to control the pH of feedwater
minimizes the corrosion of carbon steel and, thereby, reduces the iron transport to the steam
generators. The dissolved oxygen level is maintained by either deaeration or with the addition of
hydrazine. Impurities such as chlorides and sulfates are controlled to prevent SCC of steam
generator tubes.

The chemistry requirements for the demineralized or makeup water are stringent since this water is
used for reactor coolant, secondary, and other auxiliary systems where high quality water is
required.

Emergency feedwater systems have strict requirements for dissolved oxygen; however, it is noted
that not many plants have an oxygen controlled condensate storage tank, which is the typical suction
source for the emergency or auxiliary feedwater system. The chemistry in the closed or intermediate
cooling water systems can vary considerably because of the different chemical control additives
used at each site.

2.2.2 BWR Water Chemistry

The following tables present recommended water chemistry for BWRs [30]. They are included as
generic information only; however, these chemistry limits were consulted when preparing the tool
logic provided in Chapter 4 of this appendix. Each plant should compare specific chemistry limits
when implementing this tool to verify all assumptions included in the logic.

BWR components in the power production loop (condensate, feedwater, and main steam systems)
contain water or steam resulting from normal water chemistry (NWC) or hydrogen water chemistry
(HWC) to protect the reactor internals and primary recirculation components. The environment in
these systems is considered a special case of treated water for the purpose of this tool and is
discussed in the following sub-section.

Table 2-5 BWR Feedwater/Condensate

PARAMETER NORMAL POWER
OP >10% POWER
STARTUP/HOT STANDBY
(200F to <10% Power)
Feedwater Conductivity
(S/cm)
<0.065 <0.15
Condensate Conductivity
(CDI) (S/cm)
<0.10 <10
Feedwater Total Copper (ppb) <0.5
Feedwater Total Iron (ppb) <5.0
CDE
b
or Feedwater Dissolved
Oxygen (ppb)
>15
<200
c

<200
a

Condensate Dissolved Oxygen
(ppb)
>15
<200
c

Feedwater Suspended
Corrosion Products (ppb)
<100
a
After establishing condenser vacuum
b
Polished condensate
c
Upper limit may be plant specific to ensure consistency with ECP requirements

Table 2-6 BWR Reactor Water

PARAMETER
POWER OPERATION
> 10% POWER
STARTUP/HOT
STANDBY
(200F to <10% Power)
Local ECP
a
(mV, SHE)
b

Conductivity (S/cm) <0.3 <1.0
Chloride (ppb) <5 <100
Sulfate (ppb) <5 <100
Zinc (ppb)
c

Dissolved Oxygen (ppb)
d
<300
a
Assumes hydrogen water chemistry (HWC); however, tool logic does not depend on it
b
Established by each plant; <-230 mV (SHE) suggested
c
Consistent with applicant program for zinc injection
d
Plant-specific value during hydrogen addition

Table 2-7 BWR Control Rod Drive Water

PARAMETER LIMIT
Conductivity (S/cm) <0.15
Dissolved Oxygen (ppb) <200

BWR Normal Water Chemistry/Hydrogen Water Chemistry

The purpose of this discussion is to evaluate the impact of BWR water chemistry, developed
specifically for the reactor internals, on the non-class 1 components contained in the same fluid loop
(e.g., main steam, condensate, and feedwater systems). Since the 1960s, the susceptibility of BWR
components to IGSCC and other types of corrosion has been known. Significant research and
testing has provided an understanding of aging mechanisms, and has developed water chemistries
and methods that mitigate IGSCC. The guidelines and technical bases are found in the BWR Water
Chemistry Guidelines [30]. This document strengthens the recommendation for hydrogen water
chemistry (HWC), provides methodology for plant-specific water chemistry program development,
and discusses the side effects of HWC. Although the EPRI guidelines concentrate on the mitigation
of SCC for reactor internal components and recirculation piping, consideration also is given to BOP
components in the same loop (i.e., parts of the feedwater, condensate, and main steam systems).
Flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC) is an example of HWC side effects.

The decision to implement HWC requires a trade-off between the benefits, i.e., increased life of the
reactor vessel internal components, and the costs, i.e., increased radiation exposure and direct
outlays. A cost benefit analysis for HWC must explicitly address the uncertainties in many of the
important factors, such as the likelihood of SCC and the increase in exposure. Therefore, the
decision to implement HWC is plant-specific and the degree of hydrogen injection, if implemented,
may be plant-specific. According to Reference 30, thirty-one of thirty-six North American BWRs
have implemented HWC.

Depending on the specific water chemistry control objectives, Table 2-8 provides the relative
amount of hydrogen needed to achieve IGSCC protection in most reactors [30].

Table 2-8 SCC Mitigation Alternatives

IDENTIFICATION MITIGATION OPTION HYDROGEN ADDED IN
FEEDWATER (PPM)
NWC Normal Water Chemistry 0
HWC-L Hydrogen Addition Low 0.4 to <1.0
HWC-M Hydrogen Addition Moderate 1.0 to <2.0
HWC-H Hydrogen Addition High 2.0
HWC-NMCA (Noble
Metal Chemical
Addition)
NMCA with Low H
2
Addition 0.4

Generic rule-based logic for the evaluation of aging effects for BWR power production loop
components would be feasible if:

1. All BWRs were of the same design
2. All BWRs were of the same core power density
3. All BWRs had the same core management strategy
4. All BWRs had similar dose rate limitations for the power production loop
5. All BWRs had consistent operating water quality history or started operation with current
improved water chemistry guidelines

However, this is not the case, as shown by the years of research and data gathering that supports the
plant-specific nature of aging of these components. Most of the work required to evaluate
component remaining or potential life in the power production loop has already been accomplished
through the recommended economic evaluations for HWC and the responses to the NRC Generic
Letters, Information Notices, and Bulletins regarding FAC and IGSCC. These evaluations of
IGSCC and FAC in BWR plants are more accurate than the generic rule-based logic of this
mechanical tool and, in addition, address the plant-specific concerns. The stress corrosion cracking
and FAC effects are well known and should be adequately addressed in the Water Chemistry and
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion programs for each plant. This tool treats systems in the BWR power
production loop (i.e., main steam, condensate, and feedwater) as special cases of the treated water
environment regarding SCC primarily in stainless steels. Specifically, the evaluation logic will
default conservatively for this aging effect.

3. AGING EFFECTS

The Treated Water Tool identifies potential aging effects that result from age-related degradation
mechanisms. Where specific mechanisms are not applicable under the environmental and material
conditions covered by this tool, justification is provided for a not applicable determination. For
those effects that are potentially applicable, a detailed discussion of the environmental conditions
necessary for the effects to be active is included. Many different degradation mechanisms are
covered in this tool. However, the aging effects resulting from these mechanisms can be included in
five categories: 1) loss of material, 2) cracking, 3) reduction of fracture toughness, 4) distortion, and
5) fouling. Reduction of fracture toughness and distortion are examples of a change in material
properties. Other changes in material properties are also discussed, primarily for non-metals.

3.1 Loss of Material

Aging mechanisms that can lead to loss of the metallic materials listed in Section 2.1 are general
corrosion, selective leaching, galvanic corrosion, crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, erosion, flow-
accelerated corrosion (FAC), microbiologically influenced corrosion, wear/fretting, and in certain
instances caustic corrosion. The cause of each aging mechanism is discussed in Sections 3.1.1
through 3.1.8.3.

3.1.1 General Corrosion

General corrosion is the result of a chemical or electrochemical reaction between a material and an
aggressive environment. General corrosion is normally characterized by uniform attack resulting in
material dissolution and sometimes corrosion product buildup. The metal can thin down and fail by
either penetration or lack of cross sectional area to support the required load. General corrosion
requires an aggressive environment and materials susceptible to that environment. Wrought
austenitic stainless steel, CASS, titanium and titanium alloys, nickel-base alloys, and aluminum and
aluminum alloys are not susceptible to general corrosion in the treated water environments discussed
in Section 2.2. However, carbon and low-alloy steels as well as cast irons are susceptible to general
corrosion in systems using treated water. In addition, copper and copper alloys are susceptible to
general corrosion in certain instances.

At ordinary temperatures and in neutral or near neutral media, oxygen and moisture are required for
iron corrosion. Both oxygen and moisture must be present because oxygen alone or water free of
dissolved oxygen does not corrode iron to any practical extent [16]. Dissolved oxygen is a major
factor contributing to the natural corrosion of steel and is part of the overall electrochemical
reactions occurring at the interface between the aqueous phase and the metal surface. In the absence
of dissolved oxygen, the corrosion of steel is greatly reduced [37]. In some treated water systems,
oxygen may be added for corrosion control. In such cases, some information on the degree of
aeration and also on the effect of the solution on any oxygen that may be present in the bulk fluid is
also important. Many organic compounds, for example, may react with oxygen and thereby
effectively remove it from solution as far as corrosion is concerned [7].

Although general corrosion is, in many cases, predictable and can be accounted for by a corrosion
allowance, it is an applicable aging mechanism for susceptible components. Aging management of
components and material can include consideration of design corrosion allowances; however, it is
inherent on each plant to assure that actual material loss experienced will not prevent these
components from performing their intended functions through the license renewal period. As long
as any allowance used is adequate for the period of extended operation required for license renewal,
general corrosion should not be a concern.

Copper alloys are used when resistance to general corrosion is required. These copper metals are
used in atmospheric, fresh and salt water in place of other more susceptible metals such as carbon
steel or cast iron [31]. General corrosion of copper and copper alloys results from prolonged contact
with environments in which the corrosion rate is very low. A patina forms on copper and copper
alloys from prolonged exposure, which gives the surface a weathered appearance. Other substances
that cause uniform thinning at a faster rate include oxidizing acids, sulfur-bearing compounds, NH
3
,
and cyanides. Copper corrodes at negligible rates in unpolluted air, water, and deaerated non-
oxidizing acids [37]. Copper alloys are resistant to neutral and slightly alkaline solutions with the
exception of those containing ammonia, which causes stress corrosion (discussed separately) and
sometimes rapid general attack [7]. However, due to the protective film which forms on the surface
of copper and copper alloys combined with the very low (negligible) corrosion rates in water,
general corrosion is not considered an aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys in a treated
water environment, unless plant-specific operating experience indicates the presence of ammonia or
ammonium salts (such as for pH control or in cleaning solvents), in which case the general attack of
copper and copper alloys may be rapid and result in a loss of function.

3.1.2 Selective Leaching

Selective leaching is the removal of one element from a solid alloy by corrosion processes. The
most common example is the selective removal of zinc in brass alloys (dezincification). Copper-
zinc alloys containing greater than 15% Zn are susceptible to selective leaching. Yellow brass (30%
zinc and 70% copper) and Muntz metal (40% Zinc and 60% Copper) are susceptible to this
mechanism. Copper alloys with a copper content in excess of 85% resist dezincification. The
addition of small amounts of alloying elements such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic, and antimony
effectively inhibits dezincification [1, 7]. The addition of 1% tin to brass, for example, decreases the
susceptibility to selective leaching [1].

There are two general types of dezincification: uniform attack and localized plug attack. Slightly
acidic water, low in salt content and at room temperature, is likely to produce uniform attack,
whereas neutral or alkaline water, high in salt content and above room temperature, often produces
plug-type attack. In both types of dezincification the zinc ions stay in solution, while the copper
plates back on the surface of the brass. The dissolved zinc can corrode slowly in pure waters by the
cathodic ion reduction of water into hydrogen gas and hydroxide ions [7]. For this reason,
dezincification can proceed in the absence of oxygen. The rate of corrosion, however, is increased
in the presence of oxygen. This process occurs in clean water with no additional contaminant
required for initiation [7].

Dezincification is the usual form of corrosion for susceptible copper alloys in prolonged contact
with waters high in oxygen and carbon dioxide, and most often is associated with quiescent or
slowly moving solutions [37].

Gray cast iron can also display the effects of selective leaching (also referred to as graphitic
corrosion) even in relatively mild environments. Selective leaching of the iron or steel matrix leaves
a graphitic network. The graphite is cathodic to iron, providing a galvanic cell. The iron is
dissolved, leaving a porous mass consisting of graphite, voids, and rust. If the cast iron is in an
environment that corrodes this metal rapidly (e.g., saltwater), uniform corrosion can occur with a
rapid loss of material strength which can go undetected since the corrosion appears superficial [7].

Aluminum bronzes containing greater than 8% aluminum are also susceptible to de-alloying of the
aluminum in a similar manner to the dezincification of brass [7, 37]. A two-phase or duplex
structure is more susceptible. This degradation effect has been noted specifically in acid solutions;
however, it was also noted that massive effects occurred in crevices where the solution contained
chloride ions [7]. Unless they are inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As, aluminum brasses should
be considered susceptible to selective leaching.

3.1.3 Galvanic Corrosion

Galvanic corrosion occurs when materials with different electrochemical potentials are in contact in
the presence of a corrosive environment, such as immersion in a corrosive or conductive solution
[7]. Galvanic corrosion can only progress if the dissimilar metals are in contact in the presence of
an electrolyte. Control of galvanic corrosion in treated water systems is possible by following the
EPRI Chemistry Guidelines [3, 30, 46] for treated water systems. As treated water (per the
Chemistry Guidelines) is a poor electrolyte, the dissimilar metals in this environment would
experience little or no galvanic corrosion. This is evidenced by the lack of operating experience of
galvanic corrosion failures in treated water systems. However, programs are not credited in the
determination of potential aging effects. Therefore, all materials addressed in this tool are
conservatively assumed to be in the presence of an electrolyte if they are normally wetted.

Components within treated water systems may exhibit galvanic corrosion if carbon steels, low-alloy
steels, or cast iron materials are in contact with wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, nickel-base
alloys, or titanium and titanium alloys. (Cast iron and carbon steel are grouped together in the
galvanic series chart and will, therefore, demonstrate similar susceptibility to this aging effect.) This
galvanic corrosion can occur if dissimilar metals are exposed to a conductive or corrosive
environment and thereby electrically connected. Galvanic corrosion may also be a concern at
treated water system interfaces where connecting systems use carbon steel, low-alloy steel, or cast
iron fittings and piping. However, dissolution of the ferritic materials would occur preferentially
under these circumstances [7] since the more corrosion resistant material (e.g., stainless steel,
titanium, or nickel-base alloy) acts as the cathode. The active (anodic) metal suffers an accelerated
corrosion rate, while the more noble (cathodic) metal experiences a reduced corrosion rate.
Therefore, wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, nickel-base alloys, and titanium and titanium
alloys are not susceptible to loss of material because of galvanic corrosion. Anodic metals like
aluminum will preferentially corrode when coupled with most metals (such as copper, stainless and
carbon steel) in an electrolytically conductive environment.
When cast iron and other anodic metals are used in treated water systems and in contact with
dissimilar metals, design features are usually included to control the rate of corrosion. Heat
exchangers, for example, may have sacrificial anodes and/or coatings where there is contact between
dissimilar materials. It is important in any aging management program to assure that these design
features are maintained through the license renewal period (i.e., periodic sacrificial anode
replacement and coating verification).

Copper and copper alloys are in the middle of the galvanic series, with steel, alloy steel, and cast
iron being more anodic (or active) and the stainless steels, nickel alloys, and titanium and titanium
alloys being more cathodic (or passive). When coupled with the more anodic materials such as cast
iron or carbon steel, the copper alloys exhibit reduced corrosion effects, whereas the cast iron or
carbon steel will be corroded. Conversely, when galvanically coupled to the more cathodic
materials such as stainless steel, titanium, or graphite, the copper alloys may demonstrate an
increased susceptibility to corrosion [1, 7].

There are five methods of eliminating or significantly reducing galvanic corrosion: 1) selecting
dissimilar metals that are as close as possible to each other in the galvanic series; 2) avoiding
coupling of small anodes to large cathodes; 3) insulating dissimilar metals wherever practicable; 4)
applying coatings and keeping them in good repair, particularly on the cathodic member; and 5)
using a sacrificial anode like zincthat is, coupling the system to a third metal that is anodic to both
structural metals.

Carbon steels, low-alloy steels and cast irons that are in contact with stainless steels, CASS, nickel-
base alloys, or titanium and titanium alloys and are subjected to treated water may be susceptible to
galvanic corrosion. Copper metals are also susceptible when coupled to the more cathodic stainless
steels and when in contact with nickel-base alloys, titanium and titanium alloys, or graphite.
However, the rate of dissolution of the ferritic material is expected to be low because of low
impurities and low conductivity of treated water.

3.1.4 Crevice Corrosion

Crevice corrosion occurs in crevices or shielded areas that allow a corrosive environment to develop
within the crevice. The nature of crevices, especially for those very small in size, is such that low
flow or stagnant conditions can exist in the crevice regions even under system flowing conditions. It
occurs most frequently in joints and connections, or points of contact between metals and nonmetals,
such as gasket surfaces, lap joints, and under bolt heads where contaminants can concentrate [7].
Corrosion susceptibility is increased in these areas because of foreign objects or debris such as dirt,
pieces of shell, or vegetation in the crevice [1]. It can also result from the accumulation of rust,
permeable scales, or deposit of corrosion products at the crevice location.

In addition to stagnant conditions in the crevice, an oxygen content in the fluid above 100 ppb is
required to initiate crevice corrosion [8]. Although the oxygen content in crevices can differ
significantly from the bulk fluid oxygen levels due to oxygen depletion, etc., a bulk fluid oxygen
level or the presence of contaminants such as chlorides to sustain the chemical reaction is necessary
for the continued corrosion in the crevice [7]. Although not required for crevice corrosion, any
impurities and high temperatures significantly increase the rate at which crevice corrosion occurs.
Crevice corrosion is not expected to cause excessive degradation in crevice joints such as socket
welds or flange joints in a properly controlled low impurity environment [8].

Crevice corrosion is a potential aging mechanism for carbon and low-alloy steels provided that the
oxygen levels in the bulk fluid are greater than 100 ppb [8]. Cast iron and carbon steel undergo the
same dissolution reaction [7]; therefore, cast iron (in its plain form) is considered to have the same
potential for crevice corrosion as carbon and low-alloy steel. Also notoriously susceptible to attack
by crevice corrosion (given a sufficiently narrow crevice in the presence of oxygen) are stainless
steels, aluminum or aluminum alloys, and other metals and alloys that depend on oxide films or
passive layers for resistance to corrosion [7].

Titanium alloys generally exhibit superior resistance to crevice corrosion as compared to stainless
steel and nickel-base alloys, but may be subject to localized attack in tight crevices exposed to hot
(>70C or 160F) chloride, bromide, iodide, fluoride, or sulfate-containing solutions. Crevice attack
of unalloyed titanium or titanium alloys will generally not occur below a temperature of 70C
(160F) regardless of solution pH or chloride concentration or when solution pH exceeds 10
regardless of temperature [37].

Crevice corrosion of copper and copper alloys is a result of conditions in the crevices such that the
crevice metal is anodic relative to metal outside the crevice that is exposed to an oxygen-bearing
environment [1]. For most copper metals, the location of the attack is generally outside the crevice,
immediately adjacent the crevice region. Classic crevice corrosion resulting from oxygen depletion
and attack is less common in copper alloys. Aluminum and chromium bearing copper alloys, which
form more passive surface films, are susceptible to differential oxygen cell attack. Local cell action
similar to crevice attack may also result in copper and copper alloys from rust, permeable scales, or
uneven accumulation of corrosion products on the metallic surface [37].

3.1.5 Pitting Corrosion

Some reactive materials such as titanium and titanium alloys exhibit excellent resistance to pitting
corrosion. Pitting corrosion is more common with passive materials such as wrought austenitic
stainless steels and nickel-base alloy steels than with non-passive materials. The mechanism of
pitting is very similar to crevice corrosion. However, while a macroscopic geometrical crevice
determines the site of crevice corrosion, a microscopic topographical feature (such as MnS particles
in carbon steels) determines the site of pitting corrosion. Nuclear plant materials, with the
exception of titanium and its alloys, are susceptible to pitting corrosion under certain conditions.
Alloys containing molybdenum (e.g., Type 316 or 316L, CF-3M, and CF-8M) are somewhat more
resistant to pitting. Oxygen levels above 100 ppb in conjunction with impurities such as chloride,
fluoride, sulfate, or copper are required to initiate pitting in carbon steel, low-alloy steel, wrought
austenitic stainless steel, CASS, nickel-base alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and cast iron [1,
7, 8, 17, 21]. Stagnant or low flow conditions which enable impurities to adhere to the metal surface
are also required for pitting corrosion to occur in these metals. Areas where sludge piles and/or
crevices exist are particularly susceptible to pitting corrosion.

Another form of pitting corrosion can occur at a gas to fluid interface. This form of corrosion is
commonly called water-line attack [1]. Typically, a differential aeration cell is developed at the
liquid surface leading to the localized attack just below the water line. All materials susceptible to
pitting are susceptible to this type of attack.

Pitting is an aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys as with most commercial metals. Pitting
can occur either as localized or general attack. Localized attack takes the form of various shapes
and sizes and is typically concentrated on surface locations at which the protective film has been
broken, and where non-protective deposits of scale, dirt, or other substances are present [1]. General
pitting takes the form of a roughened and irregular appearance over the entire material surface.
Pitting and crevice corrosion are similar corrosion mechanisms, with crevice corrosion sometimes
considered localized pitting in a crevice. Where crevice corrosion occurs in crevices that may
contain stagnant fluid even under system flowing conditions, pitting requires either low flow or
stagnant conditions to sustain the corrosion reaction and to provide for the concentration of
contaminants [1]. Of the copper alloys, the most pit resistant are the aluminum bronzes with less
than 8% Al and the low-zinc (<15%) brasses. Copper nickels and tin bronzes tend to have
intermediate pitting resistance, but the high Al and Zn copper alloys and silicone bronzes are
somewhat more prone to pitting [37].

Maintaining an adequate flow rate will minimize pitting corrosion by preventing impurities from
adhering to the material surface [8, 17]. A low flow threshold for the treated water tool is defined to
be <3 ft/sec [14].

3.1.6 Erosion and Flow-Accelerated Corrosion*

Erosion
Material loss because of erosion (liquid impingement) is possible only if the fluid contains
particulates in the fluid stream (or water droplets in two phase flow) that impinge upon the surface
of the metal. Regions that are susceptible to erosion are flow discontinuities (e.g., elbows, tees,
branch connections) where fluid velocities are high. Treated water chemistry and filtration
requirements typically preclude the buildup of particulates that could contribute to abrasive erosion.
Lined or coated components are susceptible to damage of the lining/coating under harsh conditions,
which results in corrosion potential for the base material in the eroded locations [4]. However,
where particulates are not controlled or two phase flow is present, erosion is a plausible aging
mechanism. The resistance of specific metals to liquid erosion does not depend on any one
property. However, ultimate resilience (one-half the square of ultimate strength divided by the
modulus of elasticity) and hardness appear to be the best measures of resistance to erosion [40].

Wrought austenitic stainless steel and CASS are somewhat susceptible to erosion. Because liquid
erosion is basically a surface phenomenon, stainless steel is commonly used as an erosion-resistant
metal (such as for overlays) [40]. Relative to their hardnesses, titanium alloys and Inconel nickel-
base alloys exhibit above average erosion resistance, similar to stainless steel, and so are also

*
Flow-accelerated corrosion is also referred to as erosion-corrosion in the literature, plant failure data, and the NRC
generic correspondence.
somewhat susceptible to erosion [40]. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and copper
alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys are all susceptible to erosion [1, 7].

Cavitation Erosion
A phenomenon that has been observed in austenitic stainless steel systems is cavitation erosion.
Rapidly forming and collapsing gas bubbles may produce shock waves with pressures as high as
60,000 psi which lead to damage that is similar to pitting, except that the pits are closely spaced
causing a roughened surface [7]. Cavitation erosion is typically associated with improper operation
of pumps, valves, and stationary components such as an orifice or pressure reducing device.
Examples include inadequate net positive suction head (NPSH) for pumps, high turndown for
valves, or operation below vapor pressure for any component. Cavitation erosion is considered a
design deficiency, which will be detected and corrected during the current term of operation. Loss
of material because of cavitation erosion is not an applicable aging effect for the period of extended
operation.

Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
Flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC) is the increased loss of material caused by relative movement
between a corrosive fluid and a material surface. The normally protective oxide film dissolves into a
stream of flowing fluid. The material removal process is considered to be one of oxide dissolution,
i.e., during the FAC process, there is no mechanical removal of the surface material. The extent of
FAC is influenced by (1) fluid flow velocity, (2) environmental characteristics (temperature and
fluid chemistry), and (3) material susceptibility. Wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, nickel-
base alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys used in treated water environments are resistant to FAC
[4, 19, 36, 37]. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are susceptible to FAC although in noncorrosive
environments, such as high purity water, the stronger aluminum alloys have greater resistance to
FAC [37]. However, aluminum or aluminum alloys are not typically used in treated water systems
in locations susceptible to FAC.

Reference 18 suggests that flow rates less than 6 ft/sec will not cause FAC of carbon and low-alloy
steels. However, Reference 36 states that although FAC wear rates tend to increase with increasing
bulk velocity, there is no practical threshold velocity below which FAC does not occur. Piping
layouts such as elbows, small radius changes of direction, and branch connections of 90-degrees are
most susceptible to FAC [5, 22, 36]. Temperature, pH, and oxygen influence FAC in carbon and
low-alloy steels. High pH levels (>9.5) can eliminate FAC as a concern [7, 36]. FAC rates are
greatest at temperatures of 100 to 200C (212 to 392F) and decrease rapidly above and below this
temperature range [5, 22, 36]. FAC occurs in both single-phase flow conditions, when temperatures
are above 200F, and in two-phase flow conditions, regardless of temperature [47]. Because
removal of the oxide layer will only occur when the wall of the piping or components are
continuously wet, FAC does not occur in lines transporting dry or superheated steam with no
moisture content [36, 47]. Systems of low-alloy steel piping with nominal chromium content equal
to or greater than 1-1/4% can be safely excluded from further evaluation for FAC. Systems with no
flow, or those that operate less than 2% of the plant operating time, and systems with high levels of
dissolved oxygen (>1000 ppb) can also be excluded [47]. However, a plant-specific review of such
systems may be needed if actual operating conditions cannot be confirmed, if only portions of a
FAC susceptible line have a chromium content above the specified threshold, or if lines that operate
less than 2% of the time have experienced damage caused by FAC.
Therefore, carbon steels, low-alloy steels, and cast irons are susceptible to a loss of material due to
FAC if chromium content is less than 1-1/4% and the flow conditions are single-phase greater than
200F or two-phase. FAC of copper and copper alloys is most often found with water containing
low levels of sulfur compounds and with heavily chlorinated water [37].

Some of the systems which typically transport single phase fluid in the described temperature range
and are susceptible to FAC include Condensate and Feedwater, Auxiliary (Emergency) Feedwater,
Heater Drains, Moisture Separators Drains, Steam Generator Blowdown, and other drains. Typical
two-phase systems which are susceptible to FAC include High and Low Pressure Extraction Steam
Lines, Flashing Lines to the Condenser, Gland Steam (Seal Steam) Systems, and Feedwater Heater
Vents [36].

The use of HWC in a BWR reduces the level of dissolved oxygen in the power generation loop,
primarily for components located in the steam cycle. Figure 3-15 in Reference 30 shows the effect
of dissolved oxygen on FAC. Steam side locations where the dissolved oxygen is between 7 and 50
ppb tend to be affected by FAC. In most BWR plants, such locations are found in the carbon steel
RWCU piping, heater drain, moisture separator drain, and in some of the middle extraction steam
lines. As supported by NRC generic correspondence and historical data, FAC is equally a concern
in PWR secondary systems.

Instances of FAC have been observed and are discussed further in Section 3.7. Most all U.S. plants
have made predictions of FAC rates using CHECKWORKS or other FAC modeling codes,
consistent with the guidelines of EPRI NSAC-202L-R2, Recommendations for an Effective Flow-
Accelerated Corrosion Program [47]. All plants have flow-accelerated corrosion programs in
place. The applicants can discuss the plant-specific analyses and programs to mitigate the concern
in the section on Demonstration of Aging Management. This discussion would include
commitments to GL 89-08 and consideration of Information Notices 82-22, 86-106-suppl. 1, 2, and
3, 87-36, 88-17, 89-53, 91-18, rev 0, 1, 92-07, 92-35, 93-21, and 95-11 and Bulletin 87-01.

3.1.7 MIC

Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) is corrosive attack accelerated by the influence of
microbiological activity. MIC usually occurs at temperatures between 50 and 120F, however,
microbes can withstand a wide range of temperatures (15 to 210
o
F) [32]. These organisms have
been observed in mediums with pH values between 0 and 10.5 and under pressures up to 15,000 psi
[1]. Due to the number of different microorganisms involved in MIC and the wide array of
environments that can support the growth of microbiological activity, material loss can be caused by
a variety of different chemical reactions or material property changes. Typically, MIC is manifested
as a localized loss of material similar to pitting type corrosion. The different types of microbes can
grow with or without oxygen and can thrive in many chemical environments. Some anaerobic
organisms reduce sulfate to sulfide ions, which influences both anodic and cathodic reactions on
iron surfaces [1, 18]. Several forms can metabolize NO
3
, which is used widely as a corrosion
inhibitor. These species produce many different byproducts, resulting in accelerated corrosion of
certain alloys, for example nitrate induced stress corrosion cracking. Some aerobic organisms
produce sulfuric acid by oxidizing sulfur or sulfur-bearing compounds. The ammonium producing
variety increases the corrosion of copper and its alloys [1].
MIC is not likely in treated water systems where sulfates and chlorides are low (<150 ppb).
However, contamination of treated water systems can lead to MIC. One example of MIC in treated
water components is torus damage at BWRs. Treated water systems typically are low in the
nutrients required to sustain microorganisms, but in stagnant or low flowing areas, corrosion
products and contaminants can accumulate and settle. The same contamination source for the
microorganism could also allow introduction of the nutrients required to sustain these microbes.
There are several sources of nutrients and microorganisms. Heat exchangers with treated water on
one side and either raw water or lube oil on the other side have the potential for contamination if
leakage exists for a considerable time period. In some cases the source of the treated water may
have been contaminated, especially if the source is open to outdoor air or if there is inadequate
control on makeup or other interfacing systems. Many emergency feedwater systems at PWRs are
cross connected to the raw water system and contamination is possible during testing or inadvertent
opening of valves. Maintenance of treated water system components can also result in
contamination.

There are many treated water systems such as the borated emergency core cooling systems in PWRs
that have not experienced MIC problems during the life of the plant. The potential for MIC
contamination of these systems is highly unlikely and is not expected to be a concern during the
license renewal period.

In summary, MIC is a potential aging effect in treated water when operating experience has shown a
treated water system to be contaminated with the microbes necessary to cause MIC damage.

3.1.8 Wear and Fretting

Wear results from relative motion between two surfaces, from the influences of hard, abrasive
particles or fluid streams, and from small, vibratory or sliding motions under the influence of a
corrosive environment (fretting) [2]. Loss of material from erosion and erosion/corrosion is
discussed in Section 3.1.6. Loss of material on external surfaces by wear and fretting is addressed in
Appendix E. Wear and fretting on internal pressure boundary surfaces (e.g., on pump casings and
valve bodies caused by cavitation) is under review by the NRC and industry. The user of this tool
should review regulatory correspondence and industry technical reports, etc., after the issuance of
this document to determine if pressure boundaries of pumps and valves should be evaluated for
potential wear and fretting.
3.1.8.1 Wear

Wear can result from the movement of a material in relation to another material that occurs during
active functions that are not addressed by this tool (e.g., pump and valve operations). General wear
is, therefore, not applicable for the equipment covered by these tools.
3.1.8.2 Fretting

Fretting is caused by small amplitude vibratory motion [e.g., flow induced vibration (FIV)] that
results in removal of material between two contacting surfaces. With the exception of heat
exchangers, and external surfaces of mechanical equipment, passive components in the treated water
systems are not susceptible to this mechanism. Heat exchangers and external surfaces are evaluated
separately in Appendices G and E, respectively. This mechanism is, therefore, not considered
applicable in this tool.
3.1.9 Caustic Corrosion

The common alkalies, such as caustic soda (NaOH), are not particularly corrosive and can be
handled in most applications where (solution) contamination is not a problem [7]. Therefore, the
sodium hydroxide solutions used at nuclear power plants for pH control are no different than other
water treatments except as discussed here and in Section 3.2.3.

Sodium hydroxide is commonly handled at ambient temperatures in all concentrations with carbon
steel equipment. At temperatures above ambient, corrosion rates of carbon steel become greater.
Caustic becomes increasingly corrosive with increasing temperature and concentration. Low-carbon
steel is effective in caustic solutions up to 50% concentration and at temperatures to 90C (190F).
Cast iron also shows corrosion performance similar to steel and has proven quite useful in certain
applications up to 70% concentration and 90C (190F) [37]. Austenitic stainless steels, primarily
types 304 and 316, are very resistant to caustic in concentrations up to 50% and temperatures to
about 95C (200F) [37]. The austenitic stainless steels are better than carbon steel, but for the tough
jobs (high concentrations and high temperatures) nickel-base alloys are preferred. Nickel and nickel
alloys are used extensively for combating corrosion by caustic. Nickel is suitable under practically
all conditions of concentration and temperature. In fact, the corrosion resistance to caustic is almost
directly proportional to the nickel content of the alloy [7]. Titanium and titanium alloys are very
good in moderate concentrations and temperatures, but when attacked, absorb hydrogen liberated in
the corrosion process, limiting service to temperatures of about 100C (210F) and to concentrations
generally below 50%.

Certain metals should not be used with caustic because of excessive corrosion rates, including
aluminum, magnesium, zinc, tin, chromium, and zinc-containing brasses or bronzes [37].

3.2 Cracking

Service induced cracking (initiation and growth) of base metal or weld metal may result from one or
more of the following aging mechanisms: hydrogen blistering, stress corrosion cracking, fatigue,
and in certain instances caustic cracking (also known as caustic SCC). Growth of pre-existing flaws
(i.e., material and fabrication flaws whose sizes and character were less than applicable fabrication
acceptance standards) because of service operating stresses is not discussed in this appendix but is
discussed in the Implementation Guide.

3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage

Hydrogen damage results from the absorption of hydrogen into the metal. It includes the
degradation mechanisms of hydrogen blistering and embrittlement in ferrous metals [7, 10].
Hydrogen damage usually manifests itself as hydrogen embrittlement in high strength steels and
hydrogen blistering in low strength steels and irons. Hydrogen blistering occurs primarily in low
strength carbon and low-alloy steels in the temperature range of 30 to 300F [15]. Corrosion and the
application of cathodic protection, electroplating, and other processes are major sources of hydrogen
in metals. Hydrogen blistering is most prevalent in the petroleum industry, in storage tanks and in
refining processes [7].

Another term for hydrogen embrittlement is sulfide stress cracking if the cracking is because of the
presence of hydrogen sulfide. A few ppm of absorbed hydrogen can cause cracking [7]. At yield
strengths of less than 120 ksi for carbon steels, low-alloy steels, and cast iron, concern regarding
hydrogen cracking is alleviated except when the material is temper embrittled [10]. Since the yield
strength of most of the piping and components in treated water applications is on the order of 30 to
45 ksi, hydrogen embrittlement is considered not applicable for carbon steels. The yield strength of
even the hardest ductile and malleable cast iron alloys is less than 100 ksi, with the plain cast irons
in the same range as that noted above for the carbon and low-alloy steel applications. In most cases,
austenitic stainless steels and copper and its alloys are immune to hydrogen damage, although
nickel-base alloy may be somewhat susceptible [7, 10, 16, 20].

Titanium and titanium alloys have demonstrated a tendency toward hydrogen embrittlement
although a mechanism for the generation of atomic hydrogen must be present. This could include the
titanium in contact with a corroding metal (galvanic couple), an impressed cathodic current,
corrosion of titanium, or severe continuous abrasion of the titanium surface in an aqueous medium.
Additionally, the metal temperature must be greater than 175F and the solution pH must be outside
the 3 to 12 range. The dissolved hydrogen reacts to form a brittle hydride compound which results
in the loss of ductility and tensile strength. Avoiding any of the above conditions will prevent
hydrogen embrittlement of titanium [37]. Refer to Section 3.2.3 for a discussion of the susceptibility
of titanium and titanium alloys to cracking due to hydrogen embrittlement in a caustic solution.

In summary, a review of the failure data for BWR and PWR treated water systems shows no
evidence of historical hydrogen blistering. As stated above, both occur primarily in the
petrochemical industry during the refining process. With the exception of fuel oil storage tanks and
associated piping, it is not expected that equipment within the scope of this tool will experience the
corrosive environment necessary for hydrogen damage. These tanks and associate piping are
susceptible to hydrogen damage if cathodic protection is used with an incorrect voltage setting.

Therefore, hydrogen damage is considered not applicable to carbon steel, low-alloy steel, stainless
steel, titanium and titanium alloys, cast iron, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and copper and
copper-based alloys for treated water systems, except as described in Section 3.2.3.

3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking

Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) occurs through the combination of high stress (both applied and
residual tensile stresses), a corrosive environment, and a susceptible material. For a particular
material, high stresses require less corrosive environments and highly corrosive environments
require less stress to initiate and propagate cracking. Elimination or reduction in any of these three
factors will decrease the likelihood of SCC occurring. SCC can be categorized as either
intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) or transgranular stress corrosion cracking
(TGSCC), depending upon the primary crack morphology. These modes can be mixed or the mode
can switch from one to the other. In addition, austenitic stainless steels exposed to a neutron fluence
(>1 MeV) in excess of 1x10
21
n/cm
2
[24] may be susceptible to irradiation-assisted stress-corrosion
cracking (IASCC). However, non-Class 1 mechanical components will not receive fluence levels
above 1x10
21
n/cm
2
in the period of extended operation and are not susceptible to IASCC.

IGSCC is characterized by cracks propagating along the grain boundaries of the material. It is
typically associated with materials containing excessive grain boundary precipitation or impurity
segregation. Although IGSCC usually occurs in fluid mediums with high dissolved oxygen (>100
ppb), it can occur in a low oxygen environment. IGSCC is the predominate form of SCC in BWRs.
Preferential grain boundary precipitation of carbides in austenitic stainless steels and nickel-base
alloys leads to a localized depletion of chromium in the vicinity of the grain boundary. This process
is known as sensitization and renders the material susceptible to IGSCC.

Grain boundary segregation of impurities such as phosphorous, sulfur, and silicon is another
mechanism that promotes IGSCC. Segregation can produce a grain boundary chemical composition
with a significantly different electrochemical potential from that of the bulk alloy composition. The
effect of this electrochemical potential difference is an increase in corrosion susceptibility at the
grain boundaries.

TGSCC is characterized by cracks that propagate through (or across) the grains of the material.
Numerous metallurgical factors, such as crystal structure, grain size and shape, dislocation density
and geometry, and phase composition affect TGSCC. It is most prevalent in austenitic stainless
steels subjected to chlorides and oxygenated environments.

Intergranular attack (IGA), also known as intergranular corrosion, is similar in some respects to
SCC; however, it is distinguished from SCC in that stress is not necessary for it to proceed. IGA is
characterized by deterioration of grain boundaries without appreciable attack of adjacent grains.
That is, the rate of attack on grain boundaries greatly exceeds that of the matrix material. Generally,
materials and conditions that are susceptible to intergranular stress corrosion cracking will also be
susceptible to IGA [37].
Stresses in materials are generally categorized as either applied or residual stresses. Applied stresses
are the result of operating history and loading, or stresses applied during fabrication as a result of
bolting, riveting, welding, bending, etc. Residual stresses are those stresses resulting from the actual
fabrication of the material and include cold working, tube drawing, spinning, tooling, etc. [13].
These stresses are very difficult to ascertain for any given component or material and this detailed
evaluation and identification of applied and residual stresses are beyond the scope of this tool.
Increasing the stress tends to decrease the time for cracking to occur. The criteria for the stresses are
simply that they be tensile and of sufficient magnitude. Additionally, stresses up to 10,000 lb/in
2

can be generated by corrosion products in constricted locations. The minimum level of stress
required for SCC is dependent not only on the material but also on temperature and the environment
[7]. As such, it is extremely difficult to identify a minimum threshold stress level for SCC.
Therefore, it is assumed that materials evaluated using these tools contain stresses sufficient to
initiate SCC if subjected to a corrosive environment. The user of this tool is cautioned that
thresholds (e.g., temperature) for whether an environment is corrosive with respect to SCC for a
given material may be impacted by specific component residual stresses and geometry-specific
stress intensification factors. Therefore, the assumptions included in the logic should be verified for
each plant.

A discussion of the susceptibility of austenitic stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, copper and
copper-based alloys, carbon and low-alloy steels, titanium and titanium alloys, and aluminum and
aluminum alloys to SCC or IGA in a treated water environment is provided below. The
susceptibility of these materials to a cracking in a caustic solution is provided in Section 3.2.3.

SCC of Wrought Austenitic Stainless Steel and CASS
In treated water systems, dissolved oxygen, sulfates, fluorides, and chlorides can provide the
necessary environment for SCC or IGA to occur. Stress corrosion cracking has been observed in
high-purity water (i.e., low sulfates and halogens; less than 150 ppb) at temperatures greater than
200
o
F and dissolved oxygen levels greater than 100 ppb [10]. The presence of impurities such as
sulfates > 150 ppb, chlorides >150 ppb, or fluorides > 150 ppb (primarily a PWR consideration) are
all by themselves sufficient to initiate SCC in austenitic stainless steels [9, 10]. In general, SCC
very rarely occurs in austenitic stainless steels below 140F [27, 37]. Although SCC has been
observed in stagnant, oxygenated borated water systems at lower temperatures than this 140F
threshold, all of these instances have identified a significant presence of contaminants (halogens,
specifically chlorides) in the failed components. With a harsh enough environment (significant
contamination), SCC can occur in austenitic stainless steel at ambient temperature. However, these
conditions are considered event driven, resulting from a breakdown of chemistry controls.

The susceptibility of austenitic stainless steels to SCC is enhanced if the materials are sensitized.
Sensitization can occur after welding during cooling of the HAZ. High carbon content (>0.03%)
wrought austenitic stainless steels can be sensitized, which leaves the welded joint susceptible to
IGSCC when the joint is exposed to high oxygenated water or contaminants such as halogens or
sulfates. Instances of IGSCC of Type 304 austenitic stainless steels in oxygenated borated water
have been reported at several plants and are discussed in Sections 3.7 and 4.0.

There have been reports of SCC of sensitized austenitic stainless steels in borated systems, with
thiosulfate being identified as the critical species causing SCC. Laboratory tests showed that SCC
could occur with very low concentrations (e.g., 100 ppb) of Na
2
S
2
O
3
. Higher concentrations (e.g.,
1000 ppb) of Na
2
S
2
O
3
were required in the presence of boric acid [9]. The EPRI Primary Water
Chemistry Guideline [3] uses a threshold level for sulfates of 150 ppb to require corrective action.

For a discussion of SCC in stainless steel components influenced by BWR hydrogen water
chemistry (HWC), see Section 2.2.2.

SCC of Nickel-Base Alloys
In general, nickel-base alloys are more resistant to SCC in the presence of impurities and
oxygenated water than is austenitic stainless steel. SCC of nickel-base alloys has been found to
occur in three types of environments: high-temperature halogen ion solutions, high-temperature
waters, and high-temperature alkaline environments (addressed in Section 3.2.3) [37]. As a class,
nickel-base alloys are susceptible to SCC by a wide variety of corrodents. However, in most cases,
the corrodents are specific to a few, but not all, of the alloys in this class. For example, sensitized
alloys (e.g., 800 and 600) crack in thiosulfate solutions, but stabilized alloys (e.g., 825 and 625) are
resistant. Inconel 600 and weld metal alloys 82 and 182 crack intergranularly in crevices in high-
purity water containing oxygen at elevated temperatures and pressures. In the absence of crevices,
these alloys are resistant. Inconel 690 is resistant under all conditions [37]. Additionally,
precipitation-hardenable nickel alloys (e.g., X-750) corrode intergranularly in high temperature
water containing low concentrations of chlorides or other salts [37, 40].

Therefore, it is conservatively assumed that the threshold values of impurities reported above for
austenitic stainless steels apply to nickel-base alloys (i.e., sulfates >150 ppb; chlorides > 150 ppb;
and fluorides >150 ppbprimarily a PWR consideration), particularly if the impurity is a thiosulfate
(Na
2
S
2
O
3
), as does the threshold value for dissolved oxygen (>100 ppb). However, a more
significant factor in the susceptibility of nickel-base alloys to SCC is temperature [37]. Recent
studies of Alloy 600 in a PWR environment [11] show that SCC occurs when high tensile stress,
high temperature, and a susceptible microstructure are simultaneously present. This form of
intergranular SCC is known as primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC). All failures of
Alloy 600 components reported in the field resulted from high residual tensile stresses introduced
primarily during fabrication. Other factors that may possibly influence susceptibility include high
lithium and high hydrogen content.

PWSCC susceptibility of Alloy 600, as well as Alloy 82 and Alloy 182 weld metals, is low when the
temperature is less than 600F [11]. A PWSCC screening threshold temperature of 500F was
chosen to conservatively apply to this Mechanical Tool. Therefore, PWSCC in nickel-base alloys is
considered to be significant only when exposed to temperatures greater than 500F and to reactor
coolant chemistry conditions described in the EPRI Water Chemistry Guide for the RCS [3]. The
susceptibility to SCC of nickel-base alloys in non-primary water systems is also considered to be a
concern when exposed to temperatures greater than 500F in the presence of impurities and oxygen.

SCC of Copper and Copper-Based Alloys
Some copper alloys are very susceptible to stress corrosion cracking in the treated water
environments encountered in nuclear plants. The necessary ingredients for SCC in copper alloys, as
for all metals, are high stress in conjunction with an aggressive environment. The necessary
chemical substance to cause SCC in copper and copper alloys is ammonia or other ammonium
compounds. These chemical substances are sometimes used in treated water systems to control the
fluid pH or can be present as a result of an ammonium based cleaning solvent. Ammonia can also
be present in the atmosphere as a result of organic decay. In addition to ammonia or ammonium
compounds, oxygen and moisture are also required to promote SCC in the copper alloys while other
contaminants such as carbon dioxide may act as catalysts to increase the rate of cracking. A thin
moisture film on the metal surface is capable of absorbing a significant amount of ammonia, even
from air containing a low ammonia concentration [1].

Copper alloys containing greater than 15% Zn are highly susceptible to stress corrosion cracking.
The best-known example of stress corrosion cracking is probably the season cracking of yellow
brass ammunition shells in a moist ammonia filled environment [7, 16]. Brass alloys containing less
than 15% Zn exhibit almost no susceptibility to SCC. Conversely, brasses containing 20 to 40% Zn
demonstrate high susceptibility to SCC, with susceptibility increasing as the Zn content is increased.
Inhibited copper alloys produced by the addition of small amounts of other alloying elements (e.g.,
Sn, As, etc.,) to brass alloys have demonstrated increased resistance to selective leaching; however,
these inhibited alloys do not appear to provide an increased resistance to SCC [1]. All copper
alloys (both brasses and bronzes) containing in excess of 15% Zn should be considered susceptible
to SCC regardless of any added inhibiting elements such as Sn or As.

Bronze (copper-tin alloys), copper-nickel, and copper-silicon alloys are considerably more resistant
to stress corrosion cracking than the copper-zinc (brass) alloys [7, 16]. These alloys are not
considered susceptible to SCC/IGA for this treated water tool. Aluminum bronze, however, has
exhibited high susceptibility to SCC in a moist ammonia environment [1]. SCC is not possible in
pure copper [38].

Intergranular corrosion of copper alloys does not occur frequently and, when it does occur, is
usually associated with high-pressure steam environments. The effects of this degradation
mechanism are similar to SCC except that mechanical stress is not required to initiate the
intergranular corrosion [1]. Typically the alloys that are susceptible to SCC are also susceptible to
intergranular corrosion. These include Muntz metal, admiralty metal, yellow brass, commercial
bronze, and aluminum brasses. One exception to the inclusion rule appears to be silicon bronze
alloys, which are resistant to SCC but do demonstrate a susceptibility to intergranular corrosion.
(Silicon bronze alloys are also susceptible to embrittlement in high pressure steam environments,
which may be partially responsible for the susceptibility to intergranular corrosion of these
alloys [1]).

SCC of Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels
SCC of carbon steels, low-alloy steels, and cast iron is possible particularly in aqueous chlorides.
One of the most reliable methods of preventing SCC is to select a material with a yield strength of
less than 100 ksi [9]. The yield strength of carbon and low-alloy steels typically used in treated
water systems is in the range from 30 to 45 ksi. Generally, steels with lower strengths are
susceptible to SCC only upon exposure to a small number of environments, such as hot caustic
solutions (addressed in Section 3.2.3), hot nitrate solutions, and anhydrous ammonia [37].
Anhydrous ammonia is not an applicable environment in the nuclear plant treated water systems and
industry data does not exhibit widespread incidence of SCC in low strength carbon steels.

However, there was one reported case suspected to be nitrate-induced SCC of carbon steel in a
treated water system. As described in Section 3.1.7, several forms of anaerobic organisms
(nitrifying bacteria) can metabolize NO
3
, which is used widely as a corrosion inhibitor in closed
cooling water systems, and produce byproducts including nitrates. Nitrates are generally not
harmful in closed cooling water systems but have been reported to contribute to SCC of carbon steel
under certain conditions at high concentrations, in the range of 10,000 ppm (1%). An increase in
nitrate concentration is primarily an indicator of nitrifying bacteria [48]. Therefore, for the purposes
of this tool, SCC of carbon and low-alloy steels is considered an applicable aging mechanism only
in treated water systems in which a nitrite corrosion inhibitor is used, and that have a potential for
MIC contamination and the necessary conditions of pH and temperature described in Section 3.1.7
SCC in higher strength bolting materials is discussed in the Bolted Closure Tool in Appendix F.

SCC of Titanium and Titanium Alloys
Grades 1, 2, 7, 11, and 12 of titanium and its alloys are virtually immune to SCC except in a few
specific environments (such as anhydrous methanol/halide solutions, red fuming nitric acid (HNO
3
),
and liquid cadmium) [37]. None of these specific environments are applicable in treated water
systems. Other titanium and titanium alloys have been found to be susceptible to additional
environments, most notably aqueous chloride solutions. However, this susceptibility is seldom
observed in actual field applications [37]. In general, titanium alloys with higher aluminum,
oxygen, and tin content are the most susceptible to SCC, whereas molybdenum is usually beneficial
in increasing SCC resistance. In binary titanium-aluminum alloys, it has been established that 5%
Al is necessary for SCC to occur in aqueous environments. Binary titanium-oxygen alloys also
exhibit a critical level of oxygen below which SCC does not occur. This level is generally taken as
less than 0.20 to 0.25% [37].

For the purposes of this tool, SCC of titanium and its alloys is considered an applicable aging
mechanism in treated water systems, in the presence of chlorides, if the titanium alloy is not ASTM
grade 1, 2, 7, 11, or 12 and contains more than 5% aluminum or more than 0.20% oxygen, or any
amount of tin.

SCC of Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
Pure aluminum is not susceptible to SCC. However, aluminum alloys containing more than 12%
zinc or more than 6% magnesium are very susceptible to cracking under mild corrosive
environments [16]. Aluminum alloys that contain appreciable amounts of soluble elements
(primarily copper, magnesium, and zinc) are susceptible to SCC in water and water vapor
environments with halides (such as chloride). Alloys of the 2xxx, 5xxx, 6xxx, and 7xxx groups of
wrought aluminum alloys are susceptible to SCC. Resistance of other wrought alloys and cast
alloys, except for 3xx.x and 7xx.x, is sufficiently high that cracking rarely occurs in service [37].

3.2.3 Caustic Cracking

Caustic cracking (historically termed caustic embrittlement) is a form of stress corrosion cracking
most frequently encountered in carbon steels or iron-chromium-nickel alloys that are exposed to
concentrated hydroxide solutions at temperatures of 400F to 480F. However, the concentration of
NaOH necessary for producing cracking increases as temperature decreases [40]. Cracking of steel
and iron, due to caustic stress corrosion cracking (CSCC), has been reported at temperatures as low
as 120F with a concentration of 50%, but a practical (safe) limit is 150F for a 50% NaOH
concentration, allowing higher temperatures for dilute, nonconcentrating solutions. Steel
construction is suitable in NaOH concentrations of 10% or less up to 190F, where no potential
exists for localized solution concentration or severely stressed conditions. The CSCC behavior of
alloy steels, high-strength low-alloy construction steels, and abrasion-resistant steels does not differ
significantly from that of carbon steel. Caustic stress corrosion cracking is not a problem for cast
irons [37].

Based on known failures of austenitic stainless steel by CSCC, cracking may occur above 220F.
Fortunately, the conditions leading to caustic cracking of austenitic stainless steel are more
restrictive than those leading to chloride cracking. Temperatures near or above the boiling point at
ambient atmospheric pressure are required and very concentrated caustic solutions are typically
necessary. Although austenitic stainless steels crack readily in neutral and acid chlorides above
140F, the effect of chlorides in an alkaline solution seems to be nil. As long as the solution remains
alkaline, the mode of stress cracking is CSCC. A solution of 0.5 g/L NaOH with a pH of 12 is
sufficiently alkaline [37]. Susceptibility of austenitic stainless steels to CSCC usually becomes a
problem when concentrations exceed approximately 25% and temperatures are above 212F.
Cracking occurs most often in the weld heat-affected-zone (HAZ) [37].

Titanium metals are very good in moderate caustic concentrations and temperatures (e.g.,
subboiling) [37]. Furthermore, the hydrogen uptake in titanium metals that may result from caustic
corrosion, as described in Section 3.1.8.3, can cause embrittlement and cracking of titanium and
titanium alloys that would be otherwise immune to SCC. As such, the thresholds for CSCC of
stainless steels are conservatively considered to be applicable to titanium and titanium alloys and to
effectively bound the conditions where caustic corrosion, and the resulting hydrogen
uptake/cracking, would be a problem.

Nickel or nickel-base alloys are extensively used in more severe applications and are essentially
immune to CSCC [37]. The lower-carbon nickel-base alloys should be used at temperatures above
600F to avoid graphitic precipitation. However, concentrations of 10% NaOH have been found to
cause CSCC of nickel-base Alloy 600 at temperatures of 550F [37].

3.2.4 Fatigue

Fatigue cracking of carbon, low-alloy, wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, and nickel-base
alloys is discussed in Appendix H.

3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness

The fracture toughness of wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, and nickel-base alloys, as well
as titanium and titanium alloys, is typically higher than the fracture toughness of carbon steels, low-
alloy steels, and cast iron. Aging mechanisms that may lead to reduction of fracture toughness are
thermal embrittlement, radiation embrittlement, hydrogen embrittlement, and in some instances
caustic embrittlement. The susceptibility of the materials listed in Section 2.1 to reduction of
fracture toughness is discussed below.

3.3.1 Thermal Aging

Thermal embrittlement degrades the mechanical properties of material (strength, ductility,
toughness) as a result of prolonged exposure to high temperatures. Carbon, low-alloy, cast iron,
wrought austenitic stainless steel, copper metals, and nickel-base alloys are not susceptible to
thermal embrittlement when exposed to normal nuclear plant operating environments [4, 25, 26, 27,
28]. Likewise, titanium and titanium alloys are not susceptible to thermal embrittlement when
exposed to normal nuclear plant operating environments. Titanium has no debilitating ductile-brittle
transition temperature, and the maximum useful temperature range is 800F to 1100F [41].
However, CASS materials are susceptible to thermal embrittlement. The degree of susceptibility is
dependent upon material composition and time at temperature. Castings with high ferrite and high
molybdenum contents are more susceptible to thermal embrittlement than those with lower values.
Recent fracture toughness comparisons between thermally aged CASS and SAW austenitic stainless
steel weldments show that the lower bound toughness values of castings are comparable to stainless
steel weldments currently in service [12].

CASS materials subjected to sustained temperatures below 250C (482F) will not result in a
reduction of room temperature Charpy impact energy below 50 ft-lb for exposure times of
approximately 300,000 hours (for CASS with ferrite content of 40%) and approximately 2,500,000
hours (for CASS with ferrite content of 14%) [Reference 12; Figure 1]. For a maximum exposure
time of approximately 420,000 hours (48 EFPY), a screening temperature of 482F is conservatively
chosen because (1) the majority of nuclear grade materials are expected to contain a ferrite content
well below 40%, and (2) the 50 ft-lb limit is very conservative when applied to cast austenitic
materials. It is typically applied to ferritic materials (e.g., 10 CFR 50 Appendix G).

Cast materials that are below the temperature screening threshold of 482F are not subject to
significant reduction of fracture toughness for the period of extended operation. A description of
acceptable aging management of reduction of fracture toughness for CASS materials may be found
in the RCS Piping Report [4] and EPRI report TR-106092 [12], which also contains more specific
screening criteria based on casting method (static vs. centrifugal), molybdenum content, and ferrite
content.

3.3.2 Radiation Embrittlement

Radiation embrittlement can result in a decrease in fracture toughness of metals and is not applicable
to carbon and low-alloy steels, cast irons, wrought austenitic stainless steels, CASS, copper metals,
nickel-base alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys covered by this tool. The non-Class 1
components addressed with this tool are not within the reactor vessel beltline region and are not
subjected to the neutron fluence required to embrittle these materials [4].

3.3.3 Hydrogen Embrittlement

See discussion in Section 3.2.1.

3.3.4 Caustic Embrittlement

See discussion in Section 3.2.3.

3.4 Distortion

Distortion may be caused by plastic deformation owing to temperature-related phenomena. In
general, distortion is addressed by the design codes and is not considered an applicable aging effect.
Creep is not a plausible aging mechanism since the high temperatures required for this mechanism to
occur (generally temperatures >40% of the alloy melting point) are not observed in nuclear plant
systems [10].

3.5 Fouling (Flow Restriction/Reduction of Heat Transfer)

Fouling is an accumulation of deposits. Water-borne deposits, commonly known as foulants, are
loose, porous, insoluble materials suspended in water. They include such diverse substances as
particulate matter, migrated corrosion products, etc. [37]. Deposits may be organic, inorganic, or a
mixture of the two. Scales are crystalline deposits that precipitate in a system. Fouling can impede
heat transfer or fluid flow in equipment and piping [37]. Some NRC or industry documents may
refer to fouling as a mechanism for loss of material. As described in Sections 3.1.4, 3.1.5, and 3.1.7
respectively, this tool recognizes that corrosion products and other deposits can contribute to the
occurrence of crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, or microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC).

Fouling causing a reduction of heat transfer applies only to heat exchangers and is addressed in
Appendix G. Plugging (flow restriction) of spray and sprinkler nozzles may be an issue, but is not
likely in treated water environments, which are typically high quality water and filtered.

Macrobiological fouling (macrofouling) is also not a concern in treated water environments, as
aqueous macroorganisms (such as barnacles, mussels, clams, and algae) are found only in raw water
systems. Operating experience has not shown flow restriction from corrosion product build-up to be
a significant issue in treated water environments. However, the user of this document should review
the latest industry developments with respect to the treatment of flow restriction as an aging effect.
3.6 Change in Material Properties/Cracking Non-Metals

The effects of aging on glass, thermoplastics (e.g., PVC and PVDF), and elastomers are
conservatively addressed in the subsections below, although detrimental aging is not expected in
nuclear power plant treated water environments based on industry operating experience and the
assumption of proper material selection and application. For additional information on the
properties and failure susceptibilities of glass, plastic (thermoplastics and thermosets), and
elastomers, the user of this tool is referred to Volume 4, Ceramics and Glasses, and Volume 2,
Engineering Plastics [34], of the Engineered Materials Handbook published by ASM
International, copyright 1991 and 1988 respectively. Alternatively, the ASM Engineered Materials
Handbook is available in a desk edition, copyright 2003 [39].

3.6.1 Glass

Glass is resistant to practically all corrosive agents except hydrofluoric acids and the caustic
alkalies, under some circumstances [16]. Even with concentrations as low as 20 ppm, fluorides in an
acid environment corrode glass severely. In the liquid phase, fluorides will severely etch glass and
produce a roughened surface; while in the vapor phase, the attack is more localized and
concentrated, evidenced by chipping and pinholes [37]. However, treated water environments do
not contain hydrofluoric acids.

Alkaline attack is much more severe than acid attack. The greater the concentration and pH of the
alkali, the greater the amount of corrosion, which is evidenced by pinholes and chipping. Glass and
other ceramics have very limited applications in NaOH, especially if high temperatures and
concentrations are involved. Borosilicate glass (Pyrex) is especially sensitive to caustic attack in hot
solutions (200F) as low as 5% concentration [37]. However, the rate of attack by alkali appears to
fall off with time [16].

Steam at 100 psi measurably attacks glass, but at a low rate [16]. Water can cause corrosion of
glass, and the severity increases with water purity and temperature, becoming greatest above the
boiling point [37]. This chemical attack of glass surfaces occurs through either dealkalization or
dissolution. Water, e.g., droplets or vapor, reacts with the glass surface and causes sodium-ion
exchange (or leaching) from the glass. The high-pH surface film that results causes accelerated
attack of the glass. Weathering of glass occurs either when alkali is leached from the glass under
high humidity or when the glass surface is exposed to alternating cycles of moisture condensation
and evaporation [39].

Silicate glasses, which comprise nearly all glasses of commercial interest, are linearly elastic, brittle
materials. Brittle materials fail in tension. Brittle materials are known to be susceptible to
subcritical crack growth in monotonic tension under the influence of an environment. The
mechanism is stress corrosion, crack growth caused by stress-assisted reaction with liquid water or
water vapor at the crack tip, and is referred to as static fatigue in the glass literature. For most
inorganic glasses, moisture is responsible for enhanced subcritical crack growth and for
deterioration in strength and other mechanical properties. The water decreases the stress required to
propagate an initial crack and cause failure at a lower applied stress. The susceptibility of a given
glass to static fatigue increases when more water is present and when the glass exhibits more surface
damage. However, models of water attack are just thatmodels, and the specific attack
mechanisms are still not known with certainty. With rare exceptions, surface cracks are the sources
of failure (the fracture origins) in glasses because glasses usually have few internal flaws, maximum
tensile stresses are typically on the surface, and any surface cracks are exposed to the environment
[43].

Glass is typically not used in steam or other treated water environments above the boiling point and
proper glass composition selection is assumed for any use of glass exposed to NaOH concentrations.
Also, surface cracks and flaws are minimal in glasses typically used in treated water environments,
and the age-related causes of surface damage that could result in subcritical crack growth (or slow
crack growth) are limited to NaOH concentrations and/or high temperature water, as described
above. As such, this tool does not include a logic for further evaluation of the effects of aging in a
treated water environment on glass.

3.6.2 Plastics (Thermoplastics)

The chemical resistance of many engineering plastics is excellent. However, most have specific
weaknesses in terms of chemical attack. Various engineering plastic families vary widely in the
degree of chemical resistance they exhibit. Typically, plastics fail because of chemical exposure in
several characteristic ways, which can be classified as plasticization, chemical reaction, and
environmental stress cracking (ESC). Plasticization may occur from exposure to a fluid with which
a plastic is somewhat miscible; the solvent penetrates the plastic, which swells, softens, and gains
weight and physical dimension, while the strength and stiffness decrease. Chemical reaction
between a plastic and an environmental substance may result in lowered molecular weight and
degraded mechanical properties. A stressed plastic may develop crazing and cracking, when
exposed to an aggressive substance, that results in rapid propagation and sudden brittle failure [39].

Another consideration for the degradation of polymers is the fact that their mechanical properties
may severely deteriorate with exposure to heat and/or light, if the polymers employed are not
properly stabilized. Mechanical stress is known to enhance degradation effects, and surface
embrittlement and consequent microcracking may occur. With many polymeric materials,
ultraviolet (UV) radiation can be the source of energy that will abstract an atom from the polymer
and start the degradation process. Oxidation initiated by UV radiation will result in eventual loss of
properties as well. A plastic may contain chemical additives that will retard these processes, but
eventually they will be consumed and degradation will proceed [44].

Certain polymer types are more susceptible than others to specific degradation mechanisms, but all
polymers can be degraded by at least one mechanism. Certain polymers form water as a reaction
product along with the polymer, and in certain aqueous environments the reaction can be reversed
and the polymer broken down. Normally these hydrolytic degradation reactions occur at extremely
slow rates, however, at conditions of either low (<4) or high (>10) pH, the rate of hydrolysis may
become perceptible. High molecular weight polymers will also break down upon exposure to
elevated temperatures. Also, many polymers will oxidize when exposed to oxygen-containing
environments. Virtually all plastics are stress cracked by some chemical environments. The biggest
problem with this is that each plastic has its own set of stress cracking reagents, and those chemicals
that stress crack one type of plastic will have no effect on others [44].
Therefore, the acceptability for use of thermoplastics within a treated water environment is a design
driven criteria and once the appropriate material has been selected, there should be no applicable
aging effects. For example, vinyl polymers and copolymers (e.g., PVC) show no effect in alkalies
and weak bases; are resistant to strong acids, but show variable behavior depending on the specific
media for environments containing organic solvents; and have a continuous heat resistance of 150-
175F. Similarly, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) shows no effect in acids or alkalies; is resistant to
strong acids and organic solvents; and has a continuous heat resistance of 300F [7]. Furthermore,
any exposure of a plastic in a treated water environment to UV radiation would require plant-
specific evaluation. As such, this tool does not include a logic for further evaluation of the effects of
aging in a treated water environment on thermoplastics.

3.6.3 Elastomers

Elastomers used in nuclear plant service can include flexible connections and expansion joints, made
of rubber, in treated water systems. For a more detailed discussion of the aging effects of typical
elastomers used in nuclear plant service, the user of this tool is referred to Chapter 7 of
EPRI report 1002950, Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools),
Revision 1 [35], which includes exposure to fluids and discusses the resistance of different types of
elastomers to water and other solvents.

3.7 Operating History

A review of operational history was performed using NPRDS and review of NRC generic
communications that apply to treated water PWR and BWR systems. Each is reported below.

3.7.1 NPRDS / EPIX Review

Reported failures of safety-related components and non-safety-related components in treated water
systems at Babcock & Wilcox (B&W), Combustion Engineering (CE), and Westinghouse (W)
PWRs and at General Electric (GE) BWRs were reviewed. Selected systems for PWRs included
Letdown/Purification and Makeup (B&W), Decay Heat Removal/Low Pressure Injection (B&W),
High Pressure Injection (B&W), High Pressure Safety Injection (CE), High Pressure Safety
Injection (W), High Pressure Safety Injection Upper Head Injection (W), Main Steam (B&W, W,
CE), Component Cooling Water (B&W, W, CE), Feedwater (B&W), Main Feedwater (W, CE),
Emergency Feedwater (B&W), and Auxiliary Feedwater (W, CE). Selected systems for BWRs
included Main Steam, Feedwater, Condensate, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling, RHR/Low Pressure
Injection, High Pressure Coolant Injection, Low Pressure Core Spray, High Pressure Core Spray,
Standby Liquid Control, Containment Spray, Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water, Isolation
Condenser, and Nuclear Steam Supply Shutoff. The components selected for failure evaluation
were accumulator, filter, pipe, pump, valve, and vessel. The failure modes investigated include age
and normal usage, unknown and other. Excluded failure modes include plugged pipe, and active
functions of valves and pumps.

Specifically, NPRDS failure mode search key words were:

foreign material/substance
particulate contamination
normal wear
welding process
abnormal stress
abnormal wear
mechanical damage
aging/cyclic fatigue
dirty
corrosion
mechanical binding/sticking
mechanical interference
environmental condition and other

As the EPIX search was conducted for Revision 3 of these tools, the above NPRDS search
conditions were matched as closely as possible for the EPIX queries. Although the EPIX search
conditions are not an exact match for the NPRDS conditions, a conservative approach was taken
when determining the appropriate search conditions. There were 5540 and 3388 records meeting the
search condition(s) for the PWRs and BWRs, respectively. These records were reviewed and those
considered not applicable to the license renewal scope were excluded (e.g., leakage past valve seat,
pump/valve internals, valve will not open/close, setpoint drift, spring, bearing, mechanical damage,
switch, misalignment, etc.). The remaining entries were categorized as shown in Tables 3-1 and 3-2
below. The failures in the first three categories involved consumables (e.g., packing, gaskets, and
seals). The number of records and the percentage of total for the following categories were
tabulated.

The data and observations for PWRs and BWRs are reported separately to identify any differences
should they exist.
3.7.1.1 PWR NPRDS / EPIX Data

Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for PWR Systems

FAILURE CAUSES
NO. OF
ENTRIES
% OF
TOTAL*
Packing 2007 44.5%
Gaskets 1659 36.7%
Seals 505 11.2%
Threaded Connections 111 2.5%
Bolting 51 1.1%
Cracked Welds 88 2.0%
Corrosion 28 0.6%
Flow-Accelerated
Corrosion
51 1.1%
Stress Corrosion Cracking 4 0.08%
Water Hammer 2 0.04%
Dry Out 1 0.02%
Freezing 1 0.02%

* Percentage may be greater than 100 owing to multiple causes of failures.

Observations
1. The number of incidents of SCC reported in borated water systems as documented in CR 76-06
and Bulletin 79-17 was missing from failure data entries. This could be because of inconsistent
and poor reporting practices prior to INPO taking responsibility for NPRDS in 1981. Although
not reported, the corrective actions that resulted from plant-specific commitments to IE Bulletin
79-17, as described in Section 3.7.2, were effective in eliminating the incidents of IGSCC.

2. One of the four reported cases of SCC occurred in a borated water system and was attributed to
contamination from halogens (chlorides and fluorides) in a stagnant 8-inch line. Another case
of SCC occurred in a Component Cooling Water system piping weld. A pinhole leak in a
Safety Injection Accumulator weld at North Anna was determined to be SCC. The last
occurrence of SCC was OD cracking of Emergency Core Cooling System piping at St. Lucie.

3. Except for corrosion as a result of flange leaks, it appears that general corrosion is not occurring
in borated water/stainless steel systems.

4. Over 93% of the reported failures were attributed to leaks in seals, packing, and gaskets.

5. Of the nine weld cracks reported for borated water systems, seven were in small connecting
lines of 1 1/2-inch NPS or less and were attributed to vibration. One weld crack was in a
charging pump casing and was attributed to high-cycle vibration. One was attributed to SCC as
noted above.

6. Weld cracking reported for the MFW system was roughly twice that reported for the EFW and
CCW systems. The least amount of weld cracking was reported for the MS system. Minor
leakage as the result of weld cracking was usually in small connecting lines such as vent, drain,
lube oil, relief valve connections, and vent nipples. The causes were attributed to vibration,
hydrodynamic loading, thermal shock, thermal stratification, and mechanical and cyclic stress.

7. Although threaded connection leaks were common, most were corrected by reapplying pipe
thread tape or sealant and retightening.

8. As expected, most all FAC failures were reported for the feedwater or main steam systems. The
few reported cases of FAC outside of the feedwater or main steam systems (e.g., EFW) were
probably caused by cavitation problems or steam cutting in the turbine driven EFW pump steam
supply lines.

9. Only about 3 1/2 to 4% of the reported failures were caused by age related mechanisms and
many of these are considered questionable as to being truly age related as opposed to short-term
or improper maintenance type failures.

3.7.1.2 BWR NPRDS / EPIX Data

Table 3-2 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for BWR Systems

FAILURE CAUSES NO. OF
ENTRIES
% OF TOTAL
Packing 1301 55.8%
Gaskets, O-Rings 379 16.3%
Seals 447 19.2%
Threaded Connections 17 0.73%
Loose/Broken Bolts/Nuts/Screws 44 1.8%
Nipples, Fittings 54 2.3%
Weld Defect/Crack/Failure 28 1.2%
Erosion 15 0.64%
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion 5 0.21%
Corrosion 9 0.39%
Stress Corrosion Cracking 7 0.30%
Pinhole Leak 5 0.21%
Pump/Valve Body Leak 13 0.56%
Flex Line 4 0.17%
Pipe Fatigue Crack 2 0.09%
Cavitation 1 0.04%
Waterhammer 1 0.04%

Observations
1. Over 91% of the reported failures were attributed to leaks in seals, packing, gaskets, and O-
rings.

2. Weld defects/cracks/failures were predominately in the main steam, feedwater, and RHR/low
pressure injection systems. The leakage as a result of weld cracking was most always minor and
usually in small connecting lines such as vent, drain, lube oil, and relief valve connections.
Most of the causes were attributed to vibration, hydrodynamic loading, and thermal or cyclic
stresses.

3. Two notable exceptions to the observations regarding weld failures occurred at the LaSalle 1&2
plants in the high pressure core spray systems. The material was 304SS in 14-inch piping and
the fluid was reactor/primary water. The failure at LaSalle 1 resulted in a 30 gpm leak. Samples
showed the cause to be biological corrosion of the weld areas, which is the only referral to
biological corrosion or MIC in the treated water entries. Isolated contamination could be the
cause of these failures.

4. Loose/Broken Bolts/Nuts/Screws were common across all the systems reported. Leakage was
mostly minor and causes were attributed to vibration, improper torquing, and thermal/cyclic
stresses.

5. There were seven entries for intergranular stress corrosion cracking. Two of these entries were
in the pump wear ring of the LPI pumps which ordinarily would not be included since the
failures occurred in active components that are not considered in aging evaluation. They were
included since SCC is infrequent in the treated water systems. Four of the entries were in the
Isolation Condenser systems. One of the four entries was at Oyster Creek involving primary
water and the heat affected zone (HAZ) of 8-inch, 304SS piping. Three of the four entries were
reported at Nine Mile Point involving primary water and 316SS valves and piping. The
associated piping was replaced in these four Isolation Condenser system cases. The only other
entry was in a Low Pressure Core Spray system involving 304SS piping.

6. Usually the entries in the Pinhole Leak or Pump/Valve Body Leak categories did not specify
enough information to determine the aging mechanisms involved. Cavitation and corrosion were
identified in a few cases.

7. As in the PWR data, most of the erosion or FAC failures were reported in the Feedwater or Main
Steam systems. Similarly, corrosion is not widespread in the treated water systems and mostly
limited to the Feedwater and Condensate systems.

8. Only about 4-5% of the reported failures were caused by age related mechanisms and many of
these are considered questionable as to being truly age related as opposed to short-term or
improper maintenance type failures.

3.7.2 NRC Generic Communications

NRC generic communications dating back to 1973 were reviewed for their applicability to aging
degradation of non-Class 1 systems containing treated water components. Several generic
communications regarding degradation on Class 1 systems were also included since their aging
mechanisms and their applicability within the bounds of the specific material and environmental
conditions are relevant to this report. The documents searched were: Circulars, Bulletins,
Information Notices, and Generic Letters. Of these, 57 were considered to be related, either directly
or indirectly, to treated water components. These included 1 Circular, 41 Information Notices, 9 IE
Bulletins, and 6 Generic Letters. These entries are discussed briefly below.

Circulars
CR 76-06: Stress-Corrosion Cracks in Stagnant, Low Pressure Stainless Piping Containing Boric
Acid Solution at PWRs
See discussions of IN 79-19 and IE Bulletin 79-17.

Information Notices
IN 79-19: Pipe Cracks in Stagnant Borated Water Systems at PWR Plants
Instances of cracking of stainless steel piping in a stagnant borated water environment were reported
in CR 76-06 and IE BL 79-17. The cracking occurred preferentially in the HAZ of welded joints
where a sensitized microstructure was found. Of particular susceptibility were stainless steel welded
joints with high carbon (>0.03%) content that were exposed to stagnant oxygenated boric acid in the
presence of contaminants such as halogens and sulfates.

IN 80-05: Chloride Contamination of Safety Related Piping and Components
IN 80-05 alerted licensees to an instance of corrosion of stainless steel as a result of contact with a
fire retardant protective coating containing cementious oxychloride materials. These materials,
when accidentally sprayed on stainless steel, have led to significant corrosion.

IN 80-38: Cracking In Charging Pump Casing Cladding
In J anuary 1980 Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo) reported to the NRC that a radiographic
examination had revealed crack indications in the cladding on the suction end plate of the 1A
charging pump at Zion Unit 1. This pump injects borated water to the reactor loops. ASME Section
XI inservice inspection rules referenced in the plant technical specification require pump
examination only once during the 10 year service interval and this pump had been in service about 7
years. The pump casing end assembly in the area of interest consists of a suction end plate of A515
grade 60 carbon steel plate welded to the casing barrel forging of A266 class 1 carbon steel using an
Inconel weldment. The entire inner surface is clad with type 308 stainless steel applied by
submerged arc welding. It was determined that initiation and propagation of the clad cracks
probably resulted from stress concentration and dilution effects in the initial corner bead pass due to
the difficult access and bead sequencing required by the fairly sharp corner geometry. Extension of
the cracks at the base metal/clad interface ranged to a depth of 1/16 inch maximum in the 1-1/2 inch
thick base material. These crack tip areas were well blunted and slightly cavitated from corrosion
effects due to lengthy exposure to the localized boric acid attack. Examination of the crack
morphology revealed that the clad cracking essentially arrested at the base metal-clad interface and
that base metal corrosion progressed at a relatively slow rate. Based on the available information no
immediate safety concern is indicated. However, the observed conditions reveal a potential source
of pump degradation over long term operations. Therefore, to assure maximum availability, it
appears prudent to perform a nondestructive examination of this pump type at the earliest practical
time during the first code required in-service inspection interval and if cracking is confirmed, take
appropriate corrective actions per the rules of ASME Section XI BP&V Code.

IN 80-15: Axial (Longitudinal) Oriented Cracking in Piping
IN 80-15 reported an instance of cracking during a pressure test of stainless steel piping at a BWR in
the core spray piping. The cracking occurred adjacent to a shop weld joining a 90 elbow and a
wedge section of elbow material used to extend the elbow to 105. Augmented inspections prior to
the pressure test failed to identify the cracking. The cracking occurred in service sensitive (i.e.,
sensitized sections) of the Type 304 stainless steel piping.

IN 81-04: Cracking in Main Steam Lines
Crack indication was observed in the I.D. counterbore area of a weldment on the in-line T fitting
that connects the vertical run of 30 inch piping to the safety relief valve header and 30 inch main
steam line of the steam generator.

Cracking was also observed in the weld counterbore at the opposite end of the T-fitting during visual
examination of the piping interior. Radiographic examination of other SGs at the same site
indicated similar crack indications at the same locations. No cause was identified at the time of the
IN.

IN 82-22: Failures in Turbine Exhaust Lines
Steam erosion caused pipe rupture at steam extraction lines. Utilities performed pipe wall thickness
measurements to predict when it reaches a minimum acceptable thickness before it is replaced.
INPO has developed a guideline and recommendation to perform predictive calculations.

IN 84-18: Stress-Corrosion Cracking in PWR System
The introduction of corrodents to the RCS through contaminants in purchased boric acid and at the
free surface of the spent fuel pool is discussed in IN 84-18. Water chemistry requirements include a
check for sulfates, organics, and other contaminants that can cause SCC during all modes of
operation, including shutdown and refueling.

IN 84-32: Auxiliary Feedwater Sparger and Pipe Hanger Damage
The damage was attributed to water hammer caused by the design of the auxiliary feedwater piping
into the steam generators.

IN 84-41: IGSCC in BWR Plants
Two 4-inch diameter jet pump instrument line nozzle welds at Browns Ferry Unit 3 had two pinhole
leaks in the safe-end to reducer weld. UT revealed extensive axial cracks on both welds.

IN 84-87: Piping Thermal Deflection Induced by Stratified Flow
Thermal deflection induced by stratified flow has caused feedwater pipe support failures and
feedwater leaks because of deformed piping sections (pipe bending). This was originally thought to
be caused by water hammer but complex design features at some BWRs allow slow mixing of hot
reactor coolant water and cold feedwater which will result in thermal stratification and pipe bending.

IN 85-024: Failures of Protective Coatings in Pipes and Heat Exchangers
Information Notice 85-024 alerted licensees to a potentially significant problem pertaining to the
selection and application of protective coatings for safety related use. Two instances of blistering
and delamination of Plasite coatings were reported. The first involved a Plasite lined 24-inch
diameter pipe that experienced delamination and peeling in the pipe elbow sections; the straight
sections were not affected. Failures in the elbow sections were attributed to improper installation of
the coating because of inadequate curing.

The second instance involved severe delamination and peeling of Plasite coatings in various diesel
generator heat exchangers at one plant. The failures included severe blistering, moisture entrapment
between layers of coating, delamination, peeling, and widespread rusting. Root cause evaluations
showed the presence of cutting oils on the metallic surfaces prior to application of the coating,
metallic surface that were too smooth prior to resin application, and insufficient time of curing.

IN 85-034: Heat Tracing Contributes to Corrosion Failure of Stainless Steel Piping
IN 85-034 alerted licensees to instances of cracking of stainless steel lines caused by the use of heat
tracing. One plant experienced through-wall cracks in horizontal 1 inch NPS Type 304 stainless
steel piping as a result of stress-corrosion cracking. Cracking was attributed to the concentration of
chloride ions. The line is normally dry and heat tracing was used to dry the line following a
hydrostatic test. As the water evaporated, chloride ions in the water used for hydrostatic testing
concentrated in the section of horizontal run where the pipe sagged. Combinations of pipe sagging,
concentrated chlorides, and application of heat tracing induced stress corrosion cracking.

IN 85-056: Inadequate Environment Control for Components and Systems in Extended Storage or
Lay-up
IN 85-056 alerted licensees to problems that could occur to mechanical equipment if improperly laid
up during construction or during plant outages. Instances of corrosion damage in emergency diesel
heat exchangers and pinhole leaks in stainless steel service water systems were reported. This IN
indicated that the cited examples represented a small sample of instances that occurred because of
improper storage or lay-up. Appendix B 10 CFR 50.34(b)(6)(ii) requires a description of how the
requirements of Appendix B will be satisfied during plant operation. Among the requirements of
Appendix B, Criterion XIII addresses storage, cleaning, and preservation of materials and
equipment.

IN 86-106 (All Revisions): Feedwater Line Break
IN 86-106 alerted licensees to a feedwater pipe rupture because of pipe wall thinning. The pipe
material was ASTM A-106B carbon steel and the elbow was 18-inch, extra strong ASTM A-234
Grade WPB carbon steel. This wall thinning was caused by erosion/corrosion; some corrosion
pitting was also observed.

IN 87-36: Significant Unexpected Erosion of Feedwater Lines
Wall thinning has been experienced within straight sections of main feedwater system piping. EPRI
code CHEC would not have required that the pipe wall in these straight sections be examined.
Erosion/corrosion of carbon steel is the cause of pipe wall thinning.

IN 88-17: Summary of Responses to NRC Bulletin 87-01, Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power
Plants
This Information Notice provides a summary of single and two-phase systems pipe wall thinning
induced by erosion/corrosion to date. In IE Bulletin 87-01 the NRC requested all licensees to
provide information concerning programs to monitor pipe wall thinning which are summarized in
this IN. Internal piping erosion caused leaks in a feedpump minimum-flow line at LaSalle County
Unit 1.

IN 88-37: Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components
This information notice alerted licensees to a potentially generic problem involving flow blockage in
safety-related piping interconnections due to biofouling. This condition may occur and not be
detected due to stagnant water in system interconnecting piping which is not routinely flushed or
flow tested. The IN stressed the importance of maintaining these lines free of clams, corrosion, and
other foreign material.

IN 88-87: Pump Wear and Foreign Objects in Plant Piping Systems
AFW pump casing excessive wear has produced foreign objects floating in the system causing flow
blockage. Increased inspection was recommended.

IN 89-01: Valve Body Erosion
Significant but localized valve body internal surface wear because of erosion of carbon steel valve
bodies has been detected. Although this wear problem with carbon steel globe valve bodies was
identified at one site in the 24-inch RHR/LPCI system and 16-inch suppression pool isolation
valves, this information notice covers all carbon steel valve bodies in safety related systems. It is
known that excessive throttling of globe valves (below their design flow range) can promote
cavitation, which enhances internal valve body erosion.

IN 89-53: Rupture of Extraction Steam Line on High Pressure Turbine
Carbon steel pipe wall thinning on the extraction steam line from a high pressure turbine caused pipe
rupture. Abrasive erosion phenomenon is suspect owing to the turbulent flow pattern (inside
diameter mismatch between the pipe and nozzle elbow) set up because of the geometry of an elbow
section and the straight section of the attached pipe.

IN 89-80: Potential for Water Hammer, Thermal Stratification, and Steam Binding in High-Pressure
Coolant Injection Piping
This IN is for BWRs and emphasizes the importance of the thermal fatigue failures around welded
joints owing to thermal stratification.

IN 91-05: Intergranular Stress-Corrosion Cracking in Pressurized Water Reactor Safety Injection
Accumulator Nozzles
IN 91-05 alerted licensees to instances of IGSCC of PWR safety injection accumulator nozzles.
Failures were reported at two PWRs. At one plant, the leak occurred in a nozzle submerged in
borated water at the bottom of the accumulator. The cause of the failure was attributed to an
improper fit-up at the nozzle-socket to pipe joint, which resulted in high stresses on the sensitized
stainless steel nozzle. A failed nozzle at a second plant was discovered during the 10-year inservice
inspection hydrostatic test. The leak was located in a 2-inch instrument nozzle. Subsequent root
cause evaluation determined the failure to be IGSCC of the sensitized stainless steel nozzle. In both
instances the failures were attributed to IGSCC of sensitized stainless steel nozzles.

IN 91-18 (Revisions 0 and 1): High-Energy Piping Failures Caused by Wall Thinning
IN 91-18 alerted licensees of continued signs of erosion/corrosion induced pipe wall thinning in
high energy piping systems despite implementation of long-term monitoring programs pursuant
to GL 89-08.

Events recently encountered are in carbon steel piping with system temperatures ranging from 280
to 445F, system pressure of 500 to 1080 psi, flow of 9 to 29 fps with presence of turbulent flow.

Previously issued generic communications of this subject are: IN 86-106, IN 87-36, IN 88-17, BL
87-01, and GL 89-08.

IN 91-18: High-Energy Piping Failures Caused by Wall Thinning
This information notice alerted licensees to continuing erosion/corrosion problems affecting the
integrity of high-energy piping systems and apparently inadequate monitoring programs. The piping
failures at domestic plants indicate that, despite implementation of long-term monitoring programs
pursuant to Generic Letter 89-08, Erosion/Corrosion-Induced Pipe Wall Thinning, piping failures
caused by wall thinning continue to occur in operating plants. This IN suggested that recipients
review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to
avoid similar problems.

IN 91-19: Steam Generator Feedwater Distribution Piping Damage
Feedwater distribution piping damage occurred because of thermal stress, cracking, erosion and
corrosion. The damage has been attributed to improper design of the feeder ring in CE type steam
generators predating System 80 design and in other SGs with similar designs

IN 91-28: Cracking in Feedwater System Piping
Augmented inspection of the feedwater system as part of ISI is effective in identification of cracks
in the feedwater lines at PWRs. This IN addresses the issuance of NUREG/CR-5285, Closeout of
IE Bulletin 79-13: Cracking in Feedwater System Piping. The report concludes that (1) the
licensees for all of the facilities affected by the bulletin and its supplements have taken the action
required by the bulletin, and the concerns in the bulletin were confirmed, in that cracks were found
and corrected at 18 of 54 facilities. Furthermore, the report indicates that some licensees have
incorporated augmented inspections of their feedwater lines as part of their inservice inspection
programs and recommends that such licensees continue to perform the inspections because these
inspections appear to reliably detect degradation in feedwater piping.

IN 91-38: Thermal Stratification in Feedwater System Piping
This IN alerts the addressees of feedwater system piping that could be subject to unexpected and
unacceptable movement as the result of thermal stratification. Global thermal stratification results in
low-cycle fatigue, pipe movement, and stresses that might not have been considered in the design of
the piping system. The low-cycle fatigue identified here is present in long runs of feedwater piping
where the temperature difference between the water at the top and bottom of the pipe varies as much
as 200F, which is attributed to inadequate mixing.

IN 92-07: Rapid Flow-Induced Erosion/Corrosion of Feedwater Piping
This IN discusses rapid flow-induced erosion/corrosion of feedwater piping in Westinghouse
designed steam generators Type D-4, D-5, and E, in which a portion of feedwater is diverted to the
upper feedwater nozzles.

The NRC has stated in various generic communications that high velocity flows may cause rapid
flow-induced erosion/corrosion in carbon steel piping.

IN 93-20: Thermal Fatigue Cracking of Feedwater Piping to Steam Generators
Thermal fatigue cracking has been observed in feedwater piping at various plants. These failures
have been seen in PWRs. The main cause of crack growth appears to be fatigue induced by stress
from thermal stratification during cold, low-flow, feedwater injection.

Other contributing factors are high oxygen content, counterbore weld preparation geometry, and
thermal conditions during heatup, hot standby, and low-power operation.

Inspection techniques specified in ASME Section XI do not appear adequate to find cracks of this
type.

IN 93-21: Summary of Observations Compiled During Engineering Audits or Inspections of
Licensee Erosion/Corrosion Programs
This IN summarizes the NRC observations of the design and implementation of licensee pipe wall
thinning and erosion/corrosion programs.

Most problems that licensees have had in implementing erosion/corrosion programs pertain to
weaknesses or errors in the following areas:

1. Use of predictive models,
2. Calculating minimum wall thickness acceptance criteria per the design code,
3. Analyzing results of UT examinations,
4. Self assessment of erosion/corrosion program activities,
5. Dispositioning components after reviewing the results of the inspection analyses, or
6. Repair or replacing components that failed to meet the minimum wall thickness acceptance
criteria.

IN 94-63: Boric Acid Corrosion of Charging Pump Casing Caused by Cladding Cracks
IN 94-63 reported instances of boric acid corrosion of makeup pump casing caused by cladding
cracks. Cracks of austenitic stainless steel cladding, which caused corrosion and loss of the
underlying ferritic steel, were found in both the suction and discharge of the affected pumps. No
root cause evaluation was provided.

IN 95-11: Failure of Condensate Piping Because of Erosion/Corrosion at a Flow-Straightening
Device
IN 95-11 discussed erosion/corrosion of a condensate line (carbon steel piping) between two
feedwater heaters. The condensate line containing the flow-metering device and flow straightener
was in the erosion/corrosion program and modeled with CHECMATE, but it was modeled as a
straight 16 inch pipe section without any diameter or thickness change.

IN 97-76: Degraded Throttle Valves in Emergency Core Cooling System Resulting from Cavitation-
Induced Erosion During a Loss-of-Coolant Accident
This IN alerted licensees to potential problems caused by degradation of emergency core cooling
system (ECCS) throttle valves in the intermediate-head safety injection pump hot-leg and cold-leg
flow paths and in the charging pump (high-head safety injection) cold-leg flow paths during certain
loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) scenarios. Specifically, the IN addressed cavitation and erosion of
throttling valves. Licensees were asked to review information for applicability to their facilities and
consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems.

IN 97-84: Rupture in Extraction Steam Piping as a Result of Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
This information notice alerted licensees to potential generic problems related to the occurrence and
prediction of flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC) in extraction steam systems. It was suggested that
licensees review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as
appropriate, to avoid similar problems.

IN 99-19: Rupture of the Shell Side of a Feedwater Heater at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant
IN 99-19 alerted licensees to the potential of feedwater heater shell side rupture due to wall thinning.
Extraction steam entered the feedwater heater and was deflected by a diffuser plate, impinging the
shell wall. Due to substandard steam quality, this lead to thinning of the shell wall via erosion and
eventually, shell rupture. It was suggested that an inspection program for feedwater heaters be
included in any periodic inspection programs.

IN 01-09: Main Feedwater System Degradation in Safety Related ASME Code Class 2 Piping Inside
the Containment of a Pressurized Water Reactor
This information notice reported an instance of the discovery of main feedwater system wall
thinning below allowable limits. Of concern to the NRC is the degradation of non-isolable sections
of single-phase ASME Code Class 2 piping inside containment. This thinning is brought on by the
flowing single and two-phase fluids in the form of flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC). Licensees
were reminded of the importance of maintaining the wall thickness of high energy piping within
allowable values.

IN 02-002 (with supplement): Recent Experience with Plugged Steam Generator Tubes
This information notice alerted licensees to potential for a plugged tube to affect the integrity of
adjacent tubes. A plugged steam generator tube was severed near the secondary side of the upper
tubesheet and damaged four adjacent in-service (i.e., nonplugged) tubes. The preliminary laboratory
investigation of the severed tube found signs of high cycle fatigue, ductile failure, and outside-
diameter-initiated intergranular attack (IGA). The licensee concluded that the IGA on the outside of
the tube might have made it more susceptible to severing and that the plugged tube was probably a
factor in the diode effect. In addition, the industry concluded that it was unlikely the once-through
steam generator tubes would sever in the lower tubesheet region. Although the phenomenon of
diode effect does not appear to be widespread, it may become more frequent as more tubes are
plugged and as the length of time plugged tubes are in service increases.

IN 02-021 (with supplement): Axial Outside-Diameter Cracking Affecting Thermally Treated Alloy
600 Steam Generator Tubing
This information notice alerted licensees of preliminary indications of axial outside-diameter (OD)
cracking of thermally treated Alloy 600 steam generator (SG) tubing. Most steam generators placed
into service before the early 1980s used tubing fabricated from mill-annealed Alloy 600. This tubing
was found to be susceptible to degradation, including stress corrosion cracking. To reduce
susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking, many steam generators placed into service during the
1980s were made of thermally treated Alloy 600 tubing. Operating experience has confirmed the
superior corrosion resistance of thermally treated Alloy 600 tubing. Until the recent findings, no
known or likely instances of stress corrosion cracking affecting thermally treated Alloy 600 tubing
had been reported in the United States. The findings underscore the importance of being alert
during inspections to evidence of possible stress corrosion cracking, regardless of how long the
steam generators have been operating.

IN 03-01: Steam Generator Tube Degradation at Diablo Canyon
This information notice alerted licensees of findings from a recent steam generator tube inspection at
the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Several potentially leaking SG tubes were identified and
subsequent eddy current testing identified two contributing degradation modes: circumferential
primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) in the U-bend region and axial outside diameter
stress corrosion cracking (ODSCC) at the tube-to-tube support plate intersections. The previously
described examples of SG tube degradation illustrate the need for maintaining robust steam
generator inspection programs. An effective program should sample for degradation based on both
operating experience and engineering assessments of potentially susceptible locations and should be
able to conservatively predict degradation growth.

IN 04-01: Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Recirculation Line Orifice Fouling
This information notice alerts licensees to a potential common cause failure of auxiliary feedwater
pumps because of fouling of pump recirculation line orifices. A multi-stage anti-cavitational trim
package in the body of a globe valve is used as a restricting orifice at a site to limit flow in the AFW
recirculation lines. This type of flow restrictor used very small channels and holes in each stage
combined with a tortuous path to limit flow and prevent cavitation. Post-maintenance surveillance
testing of the motor-driven AFW pump at the site revealed a reduced recirculation line flow.
Further evaluations observed partial blockage in 24 of the 54 holes in the outmost sleeve of the
restricting orifice. No evidence of debris or particles was found during inspection of the piping at
the orifice location. The orifice was cleaned, reassembled, reinstalled, and successfully tested.
However, further evaluation determined that the potential for orifice plugging, from the safety-
related suction source of service water (raw water) was not properly considered in the design
process.

IN 04-08: Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Attributable to Propagation of Cracking in
Reactor Vessel Nozzle Welds
This information notice was issued to alert licensees to cracking identified in the nozzle-to-cap weld
of control (CRD) return line penetrations of a reactor vessel at a boiling water reactor (BWR) site.
Alloy 600 CRD return lines are welded to a low-alloy steel reactor vessel with Alloy 82/182
material. As indicated in BWRVIP-49, both Alloy 600 and Alloy 82/182 are potentially susceptible
to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) under normal water chemistry conditions in the BWR
environment. Alloy 600 and Alloy 82, due to its higher chromium and lower carbon content, are
more resistant to SCC than Alloy 182. Whereas SCC of the base material (nickel-base alloy) is
commonly referred to as intergranular SCC (IGSCC), SCC of the weld material is referred to as
interdendritic SCC (IDSCC) because of the nature of the elongated grains (or dendrites) in the weld.
Both degradation mechanisms refer to essentially the same phenomenon in the base metal and weld
metal.

IE Bulletins
BL 75-01, BL 75-01A: Through Wall Cracks in Core Spray Piping at Dresden 2
Take representative samples of pressure retaining welds in austenitic piping in listed piping systems
and welds in branch piping runs greater than 2-inch nominal size. Systems include Core Spray,
LPCI, Standby Liquid Poison, and Feedwater.

BL 76-04: Cracks in Cold Worked Piping at BWRs
BL 76-04 addressed stress corrosion caused through wall cracking of base metal at bend in 6-inch
SS pipe located outside of the drywell.

BL 79-03: Longitudinal Weld Defects in ASME SA-312 Type 304 Stainless Steel Pipe
IE Bulletin 79-03 reported that conventional NDE techniques were not adequate to detect centerline
lack of weld penetration in longitudinal welds of Type 304 SS pipe manufactured by various
vendors. No actions were required if licensees determined that design stresses for components
within the system are less than 85% of code allowable. This bulletin is a design related issue and is
not an aging management issue.

BL 79-13 (Revisions 0, 1, 2): Cracking in Feedwater System Piping
Cracking of feedwater nozzle-to-pipe welding zones was discovered at various Westinghouse and
CE designed plants. These cracks where characterized as fatigue assisted by corrosion or stress
assisted corrosion.

All PWRs were asked to perform certain volumetric examination of their feedwater piping systems
and report any indication. No indications of cracking were found in B&W designed plants.

BL 79-17: Pipe Cracks in Stagnant Borated Water Systems at PWR Plants
IE Bulletin 79-17 addressed pipe cracks in stagnant borated water systems at PWR plants; this
bulletin is related to IN 79-19 on cracking of stainless steel piping reported above. Licensees were
required to conduct a review of safety-related stainless steel piping systems to identify systems and
portions of systems that contain stagnant oxygenated borated water. For the identified portions,
licensees were required to provide information concerning pre-service NDE, inservice NDE results,
and water chemistry controls. Plant-specific actions taken in response to IE Bulletin 79-17 were
reported to the NRC and all affected locations have been identified and corrective actions were
taken.

BL 87-01: Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power Plants
Erosion/corrosion of carbon steel pipe walls have been reported in large bore piping systems.
Although erosion/corrosion pipe failures have occurred in other carbon steel systems, particularly in
small diameter piping in two-phase systems and water systems containing suspended solids, there
have been few previously reported failures in large diameter systems with high purity water.

The NRC then requested information concerning utilities programs for monitoring the wall thickness
of pipes in condensate, feedwater, steam, and connected high energy piping systems including all
safety-related and non-safety-related piping systems fabricated of carbon steel.

BL 88-08: Thermal Stresses in Piping Connected to Reactor Cooling Systems, and Supplements
1, 2, and 3
BL 88-08 requested that licensees review the RCS to identify any connected, unisolable piping that
could be subjected to temperature distributions that would result in unacceptable thermal stresses,
and take action to ensure piping will not be subjected to unacceptable thermal stresses. Cracking
because of unacceptable thermal stresses (i.e., fatigue) is not addressed in the Treated Water Tool
but is discussed in the Fatigue Tool (Appendix H).

BL 03-01: Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-
Water Reactors
The purpose of this bulletin is to inform licensees of the results of NRC-sponsored research
identifying the potential susceptibility of pressurized water reactor (PWR) recirculation sump
screens to debris blockage in the event of a high-energy line break (HELB) requiring recirculation
operation of the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) or containment spray system (CSS) and the
potential for additional adverse effects due to debris blockage of flowpaths necessary for ECCS and
CSS recirculation and containment drainage. In the event of a HELB within the containment of a
PWR, energetic pressure waves and fluid jets would impinge upon materials in the vicinity of the
break, such as thermal insulation, coatings, and concrete, causing damage and generating debris.
Debris could also be generated through secondary mechanisms, such as severe post-accident
temperature and humidity conditions, flooding of the lower containment, and the impact of
containment spray droplets. Through transport methods such as entrainment in the steam/water
flows issuing from the break and in containment spray washdown, a fraction of the generated debris
and foreign material in the containment would be transported to the pool of water formed on the
containment floor. If the ECCS or CSS pumps subsequently took suction from the recirculation
sump, the debris suspended in the containment pool would begin to accumulate on the sump screen.
The accumulation of this suspended debris on the sump screen could create a roughly uniform mat
over the entire screen surface, referred to as a debris bed, which would tend to increase the head loss
across the screen through a filtering action. If a sufficient amount of debris accumulated, the debris
bed would reach a critical thickness at which the head loss across it would exceed the net positive
suction head (NPSH) margin required to ensure the successful operation of the ECCS and CSS
pumps in the recirculation mode. A loss of NPSH margin for the ECCS or CSS pumps as a result of
the accumulation of debris on the recirculation sump screen, referred to as sump clogging, could
result in degraded pump performance and eventual pump failure.

Previously issued generic communications of this subject are (description not provided in this
report):
BL 93-02: Debris Plugging of Emergency Core Cooling Suction Strainers
BL 95-02: Unexpected Clogging of a Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Pump Strainer While
Operating in Suppression Pool Cooling Mode
BL 96-03: Potential Plugging of Emergency Core Cooling Suction Strainers by Debris in
Boiling-Water Reactors
GL 98-04: Potential for Degradation of the Emergency Core Cooling System and the
Containment Spray System after a Loss-of-Coolant Accident Because of Construction and
Protective Coating Deficiencies and Foreign Material in Containment

BL 04-01: Inspection of Alloy 82/182/600 Materials Used in the Fabrication of Pressurizer
Penetrations and Steam Space Piping Connections at Pressurized-Water Reactors
The purpose of this bulletin is to advise licensees that additional measures may be needed to detect
and adequately characterize primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) of nickel-base alloy
materials. The bulletin also summarizes, including the identification of previous generic
communications, operating experience with PWSCC of nickel-base alloys (e.g., 600/82/182).
Furthermore, recent evidence of circumferential cracking of non-pressure boundary portion of
pressurizer heater sleeves at a U.S. site challenges the assumption that PWSCC will always be
axially oriented. Based on NRC experience with the evolution of PWSCC degradation in other parts
of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, evidence of circumferential PWSCC at a given location
has usually been observed after axial PWSCC at the location was discovered.

Generic Letters
GL 79-20: Cracking in Feedwater Lines
The purpose of this generic letter was to request design, fabrication, preservice inspection, and
inservice operating history of feedwater lines in PWRs because of cracks observed in feedwater
lines at D.C. Cook units 1 and 2. Leaking circumferential through-wall cracks were identified in the
piping heat affected zones of two feedwater nozzle to pipe welds. No aging mechanism was
identified at the time this GL was issued.

GL 84-11: Inspections of BWR SS Piping
All SS piping welds in systems operating over 200F are susceptible to IGSCC.

GL 88-01 S1: NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic SS Piping
IGSCC is a concern for all BWR austenitic SS piping that is 4-inches or larger and that contains
reactor coolant at a temperature above 200F during power operation regardless of ASME
classification.

GL 89-08: Erosion/Corrosion-Induced Pipe Wall Thinning
Pipe wall thinning in single and/or multi-phase flow high energy carbon steel systems is widespread.
This concern with erosion corrosion was emphasized by this request for information from the sites
as to the status of their pipe wall thinning monitoring programs. The NRC has previously issued six
Information Notices 86-106- Supplements 1, 2, and 3, 87-36, and 88-17 and Bulletin 87-01
addressing this problem. While the problem is more prevalent among PWRs, it also occurs in
BWRs.

Appendix A of NUREG-1344 provides guidelines for effective erosion/corrosion monitoring of
carbon steel components and additional insight to this phenomenon. This GL was issued to obtain
information from licensees concerning their commitments to put in place formalized procedures or
administrative controls to ensure continued long term implementation of its erosion/corrosion
monitoring program for piping and components within the licensing basis.

GL 90-05: Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repair of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3
Piping
This generic letter provides specific guidance to perform non-code repair of ASME code Class 1, 2,
and 3 piping. This generic letter does not address aging phenomenon but it provides approved
methodology for temporary non-code repair for ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 piping.

GL 96-04: Boraflex Degradation in Spent Fuel Pool Storage Racks
The purpose of this generic letter is to request licensees that use Boraflex as a neutron absorber in
their spent fuel storage racks to assess the capability of the Boraflex to maintain a 5-percent
subcriticality margin, and submit to the NRC a plan describing their proposed actions if this
subcriticality margin cannot be maintained because of current or projected future Boraflex
degradation. Experimental data from test programs, including blackness tests performed at various
boiling-water reactor (BWR) and pressurized-water reactor (PWR) spent fuel storage pools,
confirmed that when Boraflex is exposed to gamma radiation, the material may shrink by as much as
3 to 4 percent. Data from laboratory tests and spent fuel pool silica measurements have identified a
second factor that could affect storage rack service life, i.e., the potential gradual release of silica
from Boraflex following gamma irradiation and long-term exposure to the wet pool environment.
When Boraflex is subjected to gamma radiation in the pool aqueous environment, the silicon
polymer matrix becomes degraded and silica filler and boron carbide are released. The loss of boron
carbide from Boraflex is characterized by slow dissolution of the Boraflex matrix from the surface
of the Boraflex and a gradual thinning of the material. The boron carbide loss can result in a
significant increase in the reactivity of the storage racks. An additional consideration is the potential
for silica transfer through the fuel transfer canal into the reactor core during refueling operations and
its effect on the fuel clad heat transfer capability.

Summary
A review of NRC generic correspondence shows that a majority of the operating history failures are
discussing wall thinning as a result of FAC and cracking. The root causes for cracking are not
always identified except in those cases where the contaminant was known (e.g., chloride ions). The
operating history supports the aging effects discussed in Sections 3.1 through 3.4. The thermal
stratification aspects are addressed in Appendix H, Fatigue.

3.8 Summary of Potential Aging Effects

The previous sections discuss various aging mechanisms and their applicability within the bounds of
the specific material and environmental conditions covered by this tool. Aging mechanisms that are
deemed plausible because conditions exceed established threshold limits have been identified along
with the associated aging effects. Programs that are credited with managing aging predominantly
focus on these effects, not on the aging mechanisms themselves. Any such programs should be
evaluated on a plant-specific basis as described in Section 4.0 of the main document, outside the
scope of this tool, to demonstrate their effectiveness.

4. FLOW DIAGRAM AND SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT

4.1 Assumptions

The assumptions used to develop the evaluation flow chart are provided below.

1. Although chemistry is maintained within the specifications discussed in Section 2.2, each plant
has established impurity threshold limits that may or may not be the same as those identified in
the Section 4.0 tables. When thresholds are exceeded, corrective actions are taken to bring the
water chemistry within specifications. Significant chemistry excursions require evaluation prior
to continued operation. The ensuing logic diagrams include impurity thresholds and do not
assume that contaminants are within those limits established in a water chemistry program.
Thresholds for oxygen, chlorides, fluorides, and sulfates are provided for information. Aging
effects shown as not a concern based on water chemistry are considered applicable aging effects
that require management. The chemistry program is the aging management program managing
those effects. In addition, the flow diagrams and threshold values may be used as guidance for
developing lay-up procedures.

2. Crevice corrosion requires some type of crevice (an opening usually a few thousandths of an
inch or less in width) to occur. It is unreasonable to expect an evaluator to respond to a question
of whether or not a crevice exists within a system or component. The logic, therefore, will
assume conservatively that the potential exists for crevices in all components and systems.

3. Pitting and crevice corrosion are similar mechanisms in that crevice corrosion is typically
considered to be pitting in a crevice. Pitting corrosion requires oxygen, and some form of
impurity is also necessary to attack the oxidized surface layer of the material. Crevice corrosion
also requires oxygen; however, no other bulk fluid contaminant is necessary. Oxygen or
contaminants such as chlorides are sufficient to sustain the metal dissolution in a crevice.
Crevices are a natural place to concentrate contaminants and the tool assumes that crevices may
contain contaminants regardless of bulk fluid impurity levels. During shutdown aerated primary
coolant can have dissolved oxygen contents above 8 ppm when the reactor vessel head is
removed for refueling. However, refueling outages are usually brief, temperatures are low, and
halogen levels are still controlled to below the threshold values. No pitting or crevice corrosion
has been observed in reactor internals under these conditionsas a result of extended outages,
e.g., Three Mile Island. Therefore crevice corrosion is not expected during extended outages.

4. Pitting requires stagnant or slow moving fluid such that contaminants can concentrate on the
metal surface. For the purposes of this tool logic, low flow for treated water is defined as <3
ft/sec based on industry experience that shows velocities of 2-3 ft/sec keep the impurities from
precipitating on the component surfaces.

5. Instances of cracking of sensitized welded joints as a result of exposure to oxygenated borated
water have been corrected in accordance with the requirements of BL 79-17. It is assumed that
the damaged joints have been repaired or replaced with low carbon stainless steel.
6. Some aging effects are the result of mechanisms that require the material to be under stresses
that are difficult to predict without detailed knowledge of all fabrication, maintenance, and
operating history. The stress levels necessary to cause these aging effects are also dependent on
material type, temperature, and fluid environment. It is unreasonable to determine the stress for
each application. Therefore, it is conservatively assumed that stresses sufficient to cause these
aging effects are present. As described in Section 3.2.2, IGA is distinguished from SCC in that
stress is not required for it to proceed. By assuming stresses sufficient for SCC, the logic paths
for IGA initiation are encompassed by the SCC logic. Additionally, the aging effects of IGA
and SCC are similar. Therefore, the tool logic does not differentiate between the IGA and SCC.

7. Stress corrosion cracking, including primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC), of non-
Class 1 nickel-base alloys is not a significant aging mechanism below 500F.

8. Thermal embrittlement of cast austenitic stainless steels is not significant at temperatures below
482F (250C).

9. It is assumed all conditions that could result in cavitation erosion were corrected during the
current term of operation, and therefore cavitation erosion is not an applicable aging mechanism
for the extended operating period. An exception to this assumption would be cases where
design problem resolution resulted in a change to the current licensing basis (CLB). For
example, if the design change includes a new pump design, cavitation erosion may become
active because of the new design. Another exception is when cavitation occurs in infrequently
operated systems where loss of function may occur in the period of extended operation. In
these cases, plant-specific considerations affecting the resolution may need to be addressed in
the aging management review.

10. Organic coatings were applied in accordance with the manufacturers requirements.

11. Although MIC is not probable in treated water systems it cannot be categorically excluded due
to the potential for contamination and subsequent damage if left untreated. However, MIC is
only a potential aging effect for treated water systems where contamination with microbes has
occurred. Numerous approaches are available to control or monitor infestation into treated
water systems and it is left up to each applicant to determine how the potential for
contamination is evaluated.

12. The logic is not intended to evaluate out-of-limit conditions. If a significant transient or
intrusion has taken place, this condition will have been evaluated during the original license
period or will be evaluated upon occurrence during the license renewal period. These
conditions are not license renewal issues.

13. Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of austenitic stainless steels is not a significant aging
mechanism below 140F.

4.2 Overview

The mechanical tools are intended to provide an efficient method to identify applicable aging effects
for materials in treated water environments. Implementation of these tools at the various sites will
result in the identification of aging effects for plant equipment that must be managed during the
period of extended operation. Demonstration of the adequacy of aging management programs to
manage these effects is outside the scope of this tool and will be addressed on a plant-specific basis,
as described in Section 4.0 of the main document.

Various aging mechanisms requiring different initiating conditions can result in similar aging
effects. For example, pitting and crevice corrosion can occur under different environmental and
material conditions; however, the resultant aging effect for both mechanisms is a loss of material
and subsequent reduction in wall thickness.

Some plant programs such as water chemistry control can be credited with controlling the
environment for some systems and/or components whereby conditions do not exist for certain aging
mechanisms to occur. However, in order to credit these programs with controlling the environment,
it must be assured that this environmental control is carried over into the renewal period.

4.3 Tool Description

Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3 (added in Revision 3) identify applicable aging effects that may require
programmatic oversight for the period of extended operation. These tables summarize the
information depicted on the flow diagrams (Figure 1-Figure 4) and are organized to first address
aging effects common to the materials covered by the table and then those that are specific to a
material. The list of potential aging effects, together with the detailed mechanism discussions in
Section 3.0 and assumptions in Section 4.1 of this appendix, provides the basis for development of
the treated water tool.

Figure 1 contains the logic and criteria to evaluate aging effects for wrought austenitic stainless
steel, CASS, and nickel-base alloys within treated water systems. The upper branch of Figure 1
addresses applicable cracking and loss of material aging effects for stainless steel and nickel-base
alloy materials. The aging mechanisms covered by this logic branch include crevice corrosion,
pitting corrosion, caustic corrosion, SCC (also CSCC), and IGA. Some aging effects for a given
material only occur under elevated temperature conditions, in the presence of contaminants, or in
stagnant/low flow areas of systems and/or components. SCC, including PWSCC, of nickel-base
alloys is not applicable at temperatures below 500F. The second branch on Figure 1 provides the
logic to determine whether reduction of fracture toughness resulting from thermal embrittlement is
plausible. The last branch questions the potential for MIC by contamination in the treated water
systems. Figure 2 addresses all applicable aging mechanisms for titanium and titanium alloys,
including caustic corrosion, crevice corrosion, MIC, SCC (as well as CSCC), and IGA.

The logic for the treated water/carbon, low-alloy steel, and cast iron tool is provided in
Figure 3. The applicable aging effects include loss of material because of general corrosion, pitting,
crevice corrosion, caustic corrosion, erosion, FAC, galvanic corrosion, and MIC (and related nitrate
induced cracking); and loss of material due to the selective leaching of gray cast iron.

The logic for the treated water/copper and copper alloys and aluminum and aluminum alloys tool is
provided in Figure 4. The applicable aging effects include loss of material because of selective
leaching, galvanic corrosion, pitting/crevice corrosion, erosion, and MIC; and cracking because of
SCC and IGA. Copper and its alloys and aluminum and its alloys are not typically used in caustic
service.

4.4 GALL Comparison

The information in Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII of Volume 2 of NUREG-1801, Revision 1,
Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report Tabulation of Results, identifies material,
environment(s), typical aging effects (and associated mechanisms), and suggested aging
management programs (AMP) for various mechanical components. GALL Chapters V, VII, and
VIII tables all include items for treated water environments addressed by this tool. GALL Chapter
IV (Reactor Vessel, Internals, and Reactor Coolant System) is focused on Class 1 components that
are not addressed by this tool, but includes certain items for non-Class 1 mechanical components in
a treated water environment. The identification and evaluation of aging management programs
(AMPs) is outside the scope of this tool and will be addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described
in Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-
3 as applicable, with the following material, environment, aging effect, and aging mechanism
considerations.

While component identification is also outside the scope of this tool, the materials for the pertinent
items in GALL Chapter IV (Non-Class 1), V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the materials
addressed by this tool, which are described in Section 2.1. Stainless steel is referred to as stainless
steel, cast austenitic stainless steel, and steel with stainless steel cladding in the GALL items
for environments addressed by this tool. It is also listed with steel (carbon steel) for certain items in
Chapter VIII (VIII.E-40, VIII.G-41). Nickel-base alloys are referred to as nickel-based alloy in
the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool. Carbon or low-alloy steel is referred to as
steel or steel with elastomer lining in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool.
Coatings/linings are not credited with precluding aging effects in this tool. Cast iron is included
with steel in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool, except where gray cast
iron is specifically identified. Copper and copper alloys are referred to as copper alloy and
copper alloy >15% Zn in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool. Aluminum
and aluminum alloys are referred to as aluminum in the GALL items for environments addressed
by this tool. The non-metals that are listed in the GALL for environments addressed by this tool
include glass and elastomers. Plastics, galvanized steel, and titanium and titanium alloys are not
listed in the GALL for the treated water environments addressed by this tool.

The following GALL Chapter IV (Non-Class 1), V, VII, and VIII environments are bounded by the
environments addressed in this treated water tool, which are described in Section 2.2:

Closed cycle cooling water, Closed cycle cooling water >60C (>140F)
Reactor Coolant
Secondary feedwater, Secondary feedwater/steam
Sodium pentaborate solution, Sodium pentaborate solution >60C (>140F)
Steam
Treated borated water, Treated borated water >250C (>482F), Treated borated water
>60C (>140F)
Treated water, Treated water >250C (>482F), Treated water >60C (>140F)

The GALL items (V.F-10, V.F-9, VII.J -13, VII.J -12, and VIII.I-8) that address glass in treated water
or treated borated water concur with the conclusions of Section 3.6.1 with respect to there being no
applicable aging effects. The GALL addresses elastomer linings in treated water environments in
Chapter VII (items VII.A3-1 and VII.A4-1) and indicates that they are subject to hardening and loss
of strength due to elastomer degradation. Chapter 7 of EPRI report 1002950 [35], referenced in
Section 3.6.3 of this tool, addresses the age-related degradation of typical elastomers in nuclear plant
service, including change in material properties (e.g., hardening and loss of strength) and cracking.

The aging effects cited in GALL Chapters IV (Non-Class 1), V, VII, and VIII for metals in the
treated water environments include loss of material due to general corrosion (steel only), galvanic
corrosion, crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, erosion, and selective leaching (or a combination of
the previous), cracking due to stress corrosion cracking and intergranular stress corrosion cracking
(or a combination of the previous), loss of fracture toughness due to thermal embrittlement, and wall
thinning due to flow-accelerated corrosion. Certain GALL items (V.D1-32 and VII.E1-21) for PWR
emergency core cooling and PWR chemical and volume control pump casings cite loss of material
due to cladding breach. However, cladding breach is degradation of stainless steel, such as due to
cracking or loss of material, discussed above.

The GALL also cites cracking due to cyclic loading of older BWR isolation condenser components
(IV.C1-5) and high pressure pumps in a PWR chemical and volume control system (VII.E1-7), as
well as cracking due to flow-induced vibration for BWR steam dryers (IV.B1-16). These
mechanisms are not addressed in this tool as they are related to specific design considerations and
require plant-specific evaluation. GALL Chapter IV also addresses various effects specific to steam
generator secondary side components that are not addressed in this tool and require plant-specific
evaluation, such as ligament cracking due to corrosion and denting due to corrosion of the support
plate. In addition, GALL Chapter IV addresses wear/fretting of steam generator tubes in a treated
water environment (secondary feedwater/ steam), but does not otherwise identify wear as an aging
mechanism, consistent with Section 3.1.8 of this tool.

The GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items that address aging effects for external surfaces,
closure bolting, and heat exchangers are addressed separately in Appendix E, Appendix F, and
Appendix G, respectively. Likewise, GALL items for fatigue are evaluated separately in
Appendix H and are not addressed in this tool.

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloys, and Titanium and Titanium Alloys
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
Mechanism Applicability Criteria
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Relevant Section(s), Assumption(s), and
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. O
2
> 100 ppb Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
1. O
2
> 100 ppb
and
2. Chlorides > 150 ppb or fluorides > 150
ppb (PWR) or sulfates > 150 ppb
and
3. Low flow (< 3 fps)
IV.C1-6

V.A-23,
V.A-27,
V.C-4,
V.C-7,
V.D1-22,
V.D1-30,
V.D1-32,
V.D2-25,
V.D2-28

VII.A2-1,
VII.A3-8,
VII.A4-11,
VII.A4-12,
VII.C2-10,
VII.E1-17,
VII.E1-21,
VII.E2-1,
VII.E3-15,
VII.E4-14

VIII.A-12,
VIII.A-13,
VIII.B1-1,
VIII.B1-3,
Yes
Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.4

Specified GALL items list crevice and pitting
together for stainless steel, steel with stainless
steel cladding, steel with elastomers lining, or
stainless steel cladding but do not include
applicability criteria.

GALL item VIII.B1-1 is the only non-PWR
steam generator item listing crevice/pitting
corrosion of nickel-based alloys. See Appendix
G for discussion of non-Class 1 PWR steam
generators.

Specified GALL items list the environment as
treated water, treated borated water, closed cycle
cooling water, sodium pentaborate solution,
reactor coolant (IV.C1-6), and steam.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion

VIII.B1-4,
VIII.B2-2,
VIII.C-1,
VIII.D1-4,
VIII.D2-4,
VIII.E-24,
VIII.E-29,
VIII.E-40,
VIII.F-20,
VIII.F-23,
VIII.G-27,
VIII.G-32,
VIII.G-41

1. BWR power production loop. Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.2, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.5, 4.1.6
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys
(Contd)
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1a. O
2
> 100 ppb
or
1b. Chlorides > 150 ppb or fluorides > 150
ppb (PWR) or sulfates > 150 ppb
and
2. Temperature > 140F (stainless steel)
Temperature > 500F (nickel-base alloys)
IV.A1-10,
IV.A2-1,
IV.A2-5,
IV.C1-4,
IV.C2-22

V.A-24,
V.A-28,
V.C-8,
V.D1-23,
V.D1-31,
V.D1-33,
V.D2-26,
V.D2-29,
V.E1-7

Yes
Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL items cite cracking due to SCC,
IGSCC, or a combination for stainless steel in
treated water environments above 140F.
Cracking of nickel-based alloy is only identified
in GALL for Class 1 or PWR steam generator
components that are not addressed by this tool.

GALL environments include closed cooling
water > 60C (> 140F), sodium pentaborate

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
VII.A3-10,
VII.C2-11,
VII.E1-20,
VII.E2-2,
VII.E3-3,
VII.E3-13,
VII.E3-16,
VII.E3-19,
VII.E4-11,
VII.E4-15

VIII.A-10,
VIII.A-11,
VIII.B1-5,
VIII.B1-2,
VIII.B2-1,
VIII.C-2,
VIII.D1-5,
VIII.E-25,
VIII.E-30,
VIII.E-31,
VIII.E-38,
VIII.F-21,
VIII.F-24,
VIII.G-28,
VIII.G-33
solution > 60C (> 140F), treated borated water
> 60C (> 140F), treated water > 60C (>
140F), reactor coolant (as clarified below), and
steam.

GALL items IV.A1-10 and IV.A2-5 cite the
environment as Air with reactor coolant
leakage (Internal) Reactor coolant. The
environment may be a mixture of air and reactor
coolant in the reactor vessel flange leak
detection line. GALL item IV.A2-1 cites the
environment as Reactor coolant for the bottom
mounted instrumentation guide tube
(Westinghouse PWRs). Similarly, GALL item
IV.C1-4 cites the environment as Reactor
coolant for isolation condenser components
(older vintage BWRs). While these components
may be non-Class 1, the other considerations are
such that plant-specific review is required.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
1801 Relevant Section(s), Assumption(s), and
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. Potential for MIC contamination
and
2. pH <10.5 and temperature <210F

Note: Plant-specific conditions and
operating experience determine whether
potential for MIC contamination exists.
None No Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.7
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.11

GALL does not identify loss of material due to
MIC as an aging effect in any treated water
environment listed in Section 4.4.
Loss of Material /
Erosion
1. Material is subject to high velocity,
constricted flow, or fluid direction
change
and
2. Fluid contains particulates (single
phase) or water droplets (two phase flow)
V.D1-14 No Sections 2.1.1, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.1

GALL item cites erosion of stainless steel orifice
(miniflow recirculation) in a treated borated
water environment, for PWR emergency core
cooling systems only.

GALL does not address titanium or titanium
alloys, or the erosion of nickel-based alloys.
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys and
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
Loss of Material /
Caustic
Corrosion
1. NaOH concentration >50%
and
2a. Temperature >200F (stainless steels)
or
2b. Temperature >210F (titanium/titanium
alloys)
None No Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.6, 3.1.8.3

alloys and does not address caustic in treated
water environments, relative to aging
effects/mechanisms.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys and
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
(Contd)
Cracking /
Caustic
Cracking
(CSCC)
and
2. Temperature >212F
None No Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.6, 3.2.3

alloys and does not address caustic in treated
water environments, relative to aging
effects/mechanisms.
Nickel-Base
Alloys
Cracking / CSCC 1. Alloy 600 material
and
and
None No Sections 2.1.2, 3.2.3

GALL does not address caustic in treated water
environments, relative to aging
effects/mechanisms.
CASS Reduction in
Fracture
Toughness /
Thermal
Embrittlement
1. Temperature >482F V.D1-16
V.D2-20
Yes Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.3.1

GALL cites the effect as loss of fracture
toughness/ thermal aging embrittlement.
Environment for the GALL items is Treated
water >250C (>482F) and Treated borated
water >250C (>482F) respectively. Other
GALL items for this aging effect and
environment are Class 1 and not addressed by
this tool.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
2. Chlorides >150 ppb or fluorides >150
ppb (PWR) or sulfates >150 ppb
and
3a. Temperature >160F
or
3b. pH <10

alloys.
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
Cracking / SCC 1. Not ASTM grade 1, 2, 7, 11, or 12
and
2. Chlorides >150 ppb
and
3a. Alloy contains >5% Aluminum (Al)
or
3b. Alloy contains >0.20% Oxygen (O)
or
3c. Alloy contains any amount of Tin (Sn).
None No Sections 2.1.6, 3.2.2.
Assumptions 4.1.1.

alloys.


Table 4-2 Aging Effects Summary - Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
General
Corrosion
1. Always Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.1
Assumption 4.1.1

See pitting corrosion discussion below.
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3

See pitting corrosion discussion below.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion

1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
and
3. Low flow (<3 fps)

IV.C1-6,
IV.C2-14

V.C-6,
V.C-9,
V.D2-33

VII.A3-9,
VII.A4-12,
VII.C2-14,
VII.E3-18,
VII.E4-17,
VII.F1-20,
VII.F2-18,
VII.F3-20,
VII.F4-16,
VII.H2-23

VIII.A-15,
VIII.A-16,
VIII.B1-8,
VIII.B1-
11,
VIII.B2-3,
VIII.B2-6,
VIII.C-3,
VIII.C-4,
VIII.C-6,
VIII.C-7,
VIII.D1-8,
Yes
Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.4

Specified GALL items cite general corrosion
together with crevice and pitting corrosion as
clarified below:

o GALL items VIII.B1-8 and VIII.B2-3 cite
only crevice and pitting corrosion for steel
exposed to steam, whereas items VIII.A-15,
VIII.A-16, VIII.C-3, and VIII.C-4 cite
general, crevice, and pitting corrosion of
steel exposed to steam.
o GALL items VII.A3-9 and VII.A4-12 cite
crevice and pitting only following
degradation of an elastomer lining.


NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
VIII.D2-7,
VIII.E-33,
VIII.E-34,
VIII.E-40,
VIII.F-25,
VIII.G-38,
VIII.G-41
The GALL items are for steel or steel with an
elastomer lining exposed to closed cycle
cooling water, treated water, treated borated
water, or steam. GALL Chapter IX indicates
steel is a broad term that groups carbon, low-
alloy, high strength low-alloy steel; cast iron;
and gray cast iron.
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
1. Contact with a more cathodic (noble)
metal in the galvanic series.

Note: Treated water environments are
conservatively assumed to be an electrolyte.
With proper control maintaining low
impurities, treated water is a poor electrolyte.
None No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.3
Assumption 4.1.11

GALL items do not identify galvanic corrosion
of steel or cast iron in treated water. See
pertinent entry in Table 4-3 below.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron (contd)
Loss of Material /
Flow
Accelerated
Corrosion
(FAC)
1. Single phase >200F or Two-phase
and
2. Not dry or superheated steam
and
3. pH <9.5
and
4. Material chromium content <1.25%

Note: FAC may be applicable for drains,
traps, and other potentially high-moisture lines
from superheated steam systems.

The use of HWC in BWRs may cause the
RWCU piping, heater drains, moisture
V.D2-31,
V.D2-34

VIII.A-17,
VIII.B1-9,
VIII.B2-4,
VIII.C-5,
VIII.D1-9,
VIII.D2-8,
VIII.E-35,
VIII.F-26,
VIII.G-39
Yes Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.6

Specified GALL items cite Wall thinning/ flow-
accelerated corrosion of steel steam and
treated water.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
separator drains, and some of the middle
extraction steam lines to be affected by FAC.

Systems that meet the criteria but operate less
than 2% of plant operating time may be
susceptible to FAC if plant operating
experience has shown FAC damage.
Loss of Material /
Erosion
1. Material is subject to high velocity,
constricted flow, or fluid direction change
and
2. Fluid contains particulates (single phase
flow) or water droplets (two phase flow)
None No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.9

GALL items cite erosion for steel Class 1 BWR
components, which are not addressed by this
tool, and certain steam generator secondary side
internals exposed to secondary feedwater/steam
only. Refer to Appendix G for discussion of
non-Class 1 steam generator components.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
MIC
and

Note: Plant-specific conditions and operating
experience determine whether potential for
MIC contamination exists.
None No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.7

NUREG-1801 does not identify loss of material
due to MIC as an aging effect in any treated
water environment listed in Section 4.4.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
Material is gray cast iron V.D1-20

VII.A3-7,
VII.A4-10,
VII.C2-8,
VII.C2-9,
VII.E1-14,
VII.E3-12,
VII.E4-10,
VII.F1-18,
VII.F2-16,
VII.F3-18,
VII.F4-14,
VII.G-16

VIII.A-8,
VIII.E-23,
VIII.F-19,
VIII.G-26
Yes Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.2
Assumption 4.1.1

Specified GALL items identify selective
leaching of gray cast iron in treated water and
closed cycle cooling water environments.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Caustic
Corrosion
1a. NaOH concentration >50% (carbon and
low-alloy steel)
or
1b. NaOH concentration >70% (cast iron)
and
None No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.1.8.3

GALL does not address impacts of caustic on
loss of material in treated water environments.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Cracking / CSCC 1a. NaOH concentration >10% and <50%
and
2a. Temperature >190F
or
1b. NaOH concentration >50%
and
2b. Temperature >150F
None No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.2.3

GALL does not address impacts of caustic on
cracking in treated water environments.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel
Cracking / SCC 1. Potential for MIC contamination
and
and
3. Nitrite corrosion inhibitor in use.


Per EPRI TR-107396, Closed Cooling Water
Chemistry Guidelines, nitrate concentrations
in the range of 10,000 ppm (byproduct of
microbial activity) have been known to result
in SCC of steel.
None No Sections 2.1.3, 3.1.7, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.6, 4.1.11

GALL does not address cracking as an aging
effect for carbon and low-alloy steel (steel) in
treated water environments.

Table 4-3 Aging Effects Summary - Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Relevant Sections, Assumptions, and
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb

Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3

See pitting corrosion discussion below
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
2. Chlorides >150 ppb or fluorides >150 ppb
(PWR) or sulfates >150 ppb
and
3. Stagnant or low flow (<3 fps)

Note: The most pit resistant of the copper
alloys are the aluminum bronzes with <8% Al
and the low-zinc (<15%) brasses.
Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.4

Specified GALL items identify galvanic
corrosion, together with crevice and pitting
corrosion of copper alloys (regardless of Zn / Al
content) in closed cycle cooling water and
treated water environments, except as clarified
below.

GALL items VIII.A-5 and VIII.F-15 list only
crevice and pitting corrosion of copper alloys in
a treated water environment, and do not include
galvanic corrosion.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
metal in the galvanic series

IV.C2-11

V.A-20,
V.B-6,
V.D1-17,
V.D2-21

VII.A3-5,
VII.A4-6,
VII.A4-7,
VII.C2-4,
VII.E1-11,
VII.E3-8,
VII.E3-9,
VII.E4-5,
VII.E4-7,
VII.F1-15,
VII.F2-13,
VII.F3-15,
VII.F4-11,
VII.H1-2,
VII.H2-8

VIII.A-5,
VIII.E-16,
VIII.F-13,
VIII.F-15,
VIII.G-18
Yes
Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.3
Assumption 4.1.11


NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
1801 Relevant Sections, Assumptions, and
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of Material /
Erosion
1. Subject to high velocity, constricted flow,
or fluid direction change
and
Assumption 4.1.9

GALL items do not address loss of material due
to erosion as an aging effect for copper alloys in
any treated water environment listed in
Section 4.4.
Loss of Material /
MIC
and


NUREG-1801 does not identify loss of material
due to MIC as an aging effect in any treated
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Flow
Accelerated
Corrosion
(FAC)
and
2. Part of main steam, feedwater, condensate,
or other system identified in Section 3.1.6
and
and
4. pH <9.5

Note: Copper or copper alloys are not typical
materials of construction for FAC susceptible
systems, since the softer metals are somewhat
more susceptible to erosion-corrosion.

FAC as an aging effect for copper or copper
alloys in any treated water environment listed in
Section 4.4.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
1. Material is not an inhibited copper alloy
and
2. Material is Brass/Bronze with >15% Zn
or
material is Aluminum Bronze with >8%
Al

Note: Inhibited copper alloys contain small
amounts of other alloying elements (such as
Tin, Arsenic, Antimony)
IV.C2-12

V.A-6,
V.A-22,
V.B-5,
V.B-7,
V.D1-3,
V.D1-19,
V.D2-4,
V.D2-23

VII.A3-6,
VII.A4-8,
VII.A4-9,
VII.C2-6,
VII.C2-7,
VII.E1-13,
VII.E1-3,
VII.E3-10,
VII.E3-11,
VII.E4-8,
VII.E4-9,
VII.F1-9,
VII.F1-17,
VII.F2-15,
VII.F3-9,
VII.F3-17,
VII.F4-13,
VII.H1-4,
VII.H2-12

VIII.E-19,
VIII.E-21,
Yes Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.2
Assumption 4.1.1

Specified GALL items cite selective leaching of
copper alloys with >15% Zn in closed-cycle
cooling water and treated water environments.


NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
VIII.F-16,
VIII.F-18,
VIII.G-21,
VIII.G-23
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
2a. Fluid contains ammonia or ammonium
compound(s)
and
2b. Material is Brass/Bronze >15% Zn or
material is Aluminum Bronze >8% Al
or
3a. Material is Silicon Bronze
and
3b. Material is exposed to high pressure steam
environment

Note: The presence of ammonia or ammonium
compounds in the fluid may cause rapid
general attack (general corrosion) of
susceptible copper alloys.

GALL does not address cracking of copper or
copper alloys in any treated water environment
listed in Section 4.4.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb

Sections 2.1.7, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3

See pitting corrosion discussion below
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
2. Chlorides >150 ppb or fluorides >150 ppb
(PWR) or sulfates >150 ppb
and
V.D2-19

VII.A4-5,
VII.E3-7,
VII.E4-4

VIII.D1-1,
VIII.D2-1,
VIII.E-15,
VIII.F-12,
VIII.G-17

Yes
Sections 2.1.7, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.4

Specified GALL items identify crevice and
pitting corrosion of aluminum in treated water
environments.
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion

Assumption 4.1.11

to galvanic corrosion as an aging effect for
aluminum (anodic to most metals) in any treated
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Erosion
and
Assumption 4.1.9

to erosion as an aging effect for aluminum in
Section 4.4.

NUREG-
Tool vs
Aging Effect /
Material
Mechanism
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of Material /
MIC
and


MIC as an aging effect in any treated water
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys (Contd)
Loss of Material /
Flow
Accelerated
Corrosion
(FAC)
and
2. Part of main steam, feedwater, condensate,
or other system identified in Section 3.1.6
and
and
4. pH <9.5

Note: Aluminum metals are not typical
materials for FAC susceptible systems, since
softer metals are more susceptible to erosion-
corrosion.

FAC as an aging effect for aluminum alloys in
Section 4.4.
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys (Contd)
Cracking / SCC
1. O
2
>100 ppb
and
and
3. Aluminum alloy contains >12% Zn or >
6% Mg

GALL does not address cracking of aluminum
or aluminum alloys in any treated water

Figure 1 Treated Water / Stainless Steel and Nickel-Base Alloys
NaOH concentr at i on > 10% ? Temperat u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi sa concern. Y Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Treated Water/
Wrought austenitic
SS, CASS, Nickel-
based alloys
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
Are chlorides >150 ppb or
fluorides >150 ppb (PWR) or
sulfates >150 ppb?
Loss of material due to pitting corrosion is a concern.
Is the material in
a BWR power
production loop?
Cracking due to SCC (including
PWSCC) is a concern.
Cracking due to SCC is not a concern.
Loss of material due to pitting corrosion
is not a concern.
Loss of material due to pitting and
crevice corrosion is not a concern.
Is there a potential for MIC contamination?
Is pH <10.5 and is
temperature <210F?
Material loss due to MIC
may be a concern.
Loss of material due to MIC is not a concern.
Cracking due to SCC is
a concern.
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
sulfates >150 ppb?
Material is a
nickel-base
alloy?
Temperature >500F?
Temperature >140F? Cracking due to SCC is a concern.
not a concern.
Loss of material due
to crevice corrosion
is a concern.
Stagnant or
low flow?
Temperature
>482F?
Is material CASS?
Reduction of fracture toughness due to
thermal embrittlement is not a concern.
Potential for reduction of fracture
toughness (thermal embrittlement).
Cracking due to SCC (including PWSCC) is
not a concern.
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat ur e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
N
N
Y Y
Y
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi sa concern. Y Y
N
NaOH concentr a t ion > 10% ? Temperat u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
Y
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat ur e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi sa concern. Y Y
N
Y
NaOH concentr a t ion > 1 0% ? Temperat ur e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
Y
NaOH concentration
>50%?
Temperature >200F?
Loss of material due to caustic
corrosion is a concern.
corrosion is not a concern.
Y
Nickel-based
material (Alloy
600)?
NaOH concentration >10%? Temperature >550F? Cracking due to CSCC is a concern.
NaOH concentration >25%? Temperature >212F? Cracking due to CSCC is a concern.
Cracking due to CSCC is not a concern.
Y
N
N
Y
Is material
subject to high
velocity,
constricted flow,
or fluid change of
direction?
Are particulates (single-
phase) or water droplets
(two-phase) present in
the flow?
Material loss due to erosion
may be a concern.
Loss of material due to erosion is not a concern.

Figure 2 Treated Water / Titanium and Titanium Alloys
Y Y
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
T
T
T
reated Water/
itanium and
itanium alloys
Is temperature
>160F?
Is temperature
>210F?
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
fluorides >150 ppb (PWR)
or sulfates >150 ppb?
Loss of material due to crevice corrosion is a concern.
Is pH >10?
Is material a titanium alloy
other than ASTM Grades
1, 2, 7, 11, or 12?
sulfates >150 ppb?
Does alloy contain >5% Al
or >0.2% O
2
or any Sn?
Cracking due to SCC is a concern.
Cracking due to SCC (including CSCC) is
not a concern.
Is temperature
>212F?
Is NaOH concentration
>25%?
Cracking due to CSCC is a concern.
Is NaOH concentration
>50%?
Loss of material due to caustic corrosion is a concern.
Loss of material due to caustic corrosion is not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice corrosion is not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice corrosion is not a concern.
Is there a potential for
MIC contamination?
Is pH <10.5 and is
temperature <210F?
Material loss due to MIC may be a concern.
Loss of material due to MIC is
not a concern.
Y
N
N
Y
Is material
subject to high
velocity,
constricted flow,
or fluid change of
direction?
Are particulates (single-
phase) or water droplets
(two-phase) present in
the flow?
Material loss due to erosion
may be a concern.

Figure 3 Treated Water / Steam / Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Is the material gray cast iron? Loss of material due to selective leaching is a concern.
Loss of material due to selective
leaching is not a concern.
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
sulfates >150 ppb?
Loss of material due to
pitting and crevice corrosion
is not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice
Stagnant or
low flow?
Loss of material due to pitting
to pitting corrosion is
not a concern.
Treated Water/
Carbon and low-
alloy steel and
cast iron?
Is flow single-phase at a
temperature >200F or
two-phase?
Fluid is not dry
or
superheated?
Is pH <9.5?
Is material
content <1.25%
chromium?
flow accelerated
Loss of material due to flow accelerated corrosion is not a concern.
Is material subject to high
velocity, restricted flow, or
fluid change of direction?
Are particulates (single phase)
or water droplets (two phase)
present in the flow?
Loss of material due to erosion is a concern.
Is material in contact with a more cathodic
(noble) metal in the galvanic series?
Loss of material due to galvanic corrosion is a concern.
Loss of material due to galvanic corrosion is not a concern.
Is there a
potential for MIC
contamination?
Is pH <10.5 and
Temperature <210F?
Loss of material due to MIC
may be a concern.
Material is
carbon or low-
alloy steel?
Nitrite
corrosion
inhibitor in
use?
Cracking due to nitrate
induced SCC may be a
concern.
is not a concern.
Cracking due to nitrate induced
SCC is not a concern.
Loss of material due to general
N
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
Y Y
Y
N
N
Y
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temper at u r e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
Y Y
NaOH co ncentr a t i on > 1 0% ? Temperat ur e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
NaOH concentr at i on > 1 0% ? Temperat u r e >550 F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N
Y Temperature
>150F?
NaOH
concentration
>70%?
Material is
cast iron?
to caustic corrosion
is a concern.
Cracking due to CSCC
is a concern.
to caustic corrosion
and cracking due to
CSCC are not a
concern.
is not a concern.
Temperature
>190F?
caustic corrosion is not
a concern.
is a concern.
Temperature
>190F?
NaOH concentration
>50%?
Y
NaOH
concentration
>10%?
Temperature
>190F?
Loss of material due to caustic corrosion
is not a concern.
NaOH concentr a t ion > 1 0% ? Temperat ur e >550F? Cr acking due to CSCCi s a concern. Y Y
N

Figure 4 Treated Water / Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys

N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
Y Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y Y
N
N
N
Y
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
to pitting and crevice
corrosion and
cracking due to SCC
are not a concern.
Stagnant or
low flow?
a concern.
not a concern.
Treated Water/
Copper and
copper alloys
and aluminum
and aluminum
alloys?
Is material in main steam,
feedwater, condensate
system, or any of those
identified in Section 3.1.6?
Fluid is not dry or
superheated?
Is pH <9.5?
to flow accelerated
corrosion (FAC) is a
concern.
Loss of material due to flow accelerated corrosion is not a concern.
Is material subject to high
velocity, restricted flow, or
Are particulates (single phase)
or water droplets (two phase)
present in the flow?
Loss of material due to flow
accelerated corrosion or erosion is
not a concern.
erosion is a concern.
Is there a
potential for MIC
contamination?
Is pH <10.5 and
Temperature <210F?
may be a concern.
not a concern.
Y
N
Is material in contact with a more cathodic
Loss of material due to galvanic corrosion is a concern.
Loss of material due to galvanic corrosion is
not a concern.
Loss of material due to erosion is
not a concern.
Material is:
Brass/Bronze >15% Zn or
Aluminum Bronze >8% Al?
High pressure steam
environment?
Material
is Silicon
Bronze?
Is ammonia or an
ammonium compound
present in the fluid?
Cracking due to
SCC is a concern.
not a concern.
Y
not a concern.
Is the material
Material is not
inhibited?
leaching is a concern.
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y Are chlorides >150 ppb or
Stagnant or
low flow?
a concern.
not a concern.
Material is Aluminum
or Aluminum Alloy?
Alum. Alloy >12% Zn or
Alum. Alloy >6% Mg?
Cracking due to
SCC is a concern.
not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice, pitting
corrosion and cracking due to SCC are
not a concern.


5. REFERENCES

1. Metals Handbook, Desk Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM) International,
Copyright 1985.

2. Landes and D. E. McCabe, Toughness of Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipe Welds, Report No.
EPRI NP-4768, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, October 1986.

3. PWR Primary Water Chemistry Guideline: Revision 4, EPRI, Palo Alto, TR-105714,
March 1999
1
.


5. N. Hirota, Erosion-Corrosion in Wet Steam Flow, from Metals Handbook, Vol. 13, Corrosion,
9th Edition, ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 1987.

6. Wisconsin Protective Coating Corporation, Technical Bulletin, Plasite 7155, August 1984.

7. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, Copyright 1986, McGraw Hill.

8. D. J. DePaul, Corrosion and Wear Handbook for Water-Cooled Reactors, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1957.

9. R. H. Jones, Stress-Corrosion Cracking, American Society for Metals (ASM) International,
Copyright 1992.

10. Component Life Estimation: LWR Structural Materials Degradation Mechanisms, EPRI
NP-5461, Project 2643-5, September 1987.

11. C.A. Campbell and S. Fyfitch, PWSCC Ranking Model for Alloy 600 Components, Sixth
International Symposium on Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Systems-Water-
Reactors, San Diego, CA, August 1-5, 1993.

12. R. Nickell, M. A. Rinckel, Evaluation of Thermal Aging Embrittlement for Cast Austenitic
Stainless Steel Components, EPRI TR-106092, Research Project 2643-33, Final Report,
March 1996.

13. J. H. Hicks, D. W. Koch, and L. S. Lawrence, B&W Water Chemistry Manual for 177FA Plants,
BAW-1385, Revision 5, B&W Nuclear Service Company
2
, Lynchburg, VA, January 1990.

1
Later revisions of this document also provide recommended guidelines that are bounded by the thresholds used herein.
2
Available from Framatome ANP, Lynchburg, VA.

14. Leech, Miller, Renwick, and Wright, Conquering Service Water Pipe Corrosion, article,
Pipework and Valves, J anuary, 1984.

15. B. Craig, Environmentally Induced Cracking, from Metals Handbook, Vol. 13, Corrosion,
9th Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM) International, Materials Park, OH, 1987.

16. H. H. Uhlig, Corrosion Handbook, J ohn Wiley and Sons, 1948.

17. J . F. Hall and A. S. ONeill, Pitting of Alloy 600 Steam Generator Tubes Under Heat Transfer
Conditions, Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials
in Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, 1987.

18. G. Cragnolino, A Review of Erosion-Corrosion of Steels in High Temperature Water,
Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials
in Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, 1987.

19. I. S. Woolsey, Erosion-Corrosion in PWR Secondary Circuits, TPRD/L/3114/R87, Central
Electricity Generating Board, Leatherhead, Surrey, UK, March 1987.

20. H. H. Uhlig, Corrosion and Corrosion Control, J ohn Wiley and Sons, 1963.

21. N. Shah and P. E. MacDonald, Eds., Aging and Life Extension of Major Light Water Reactor
Components, Elsevier, New York, 1993.

22. M. Behravesh, B. Chexal, R. J ones, and K. Stahlkopf, Single-Phase Erosion Corrosion of
Carbon Steel Piping, EPRI Final Report, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA,
February 19, 1987.

23. A. A. Stein, Microbiological Induced Corrosion, Proceedings of the Third International
Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Reactors, American
Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL 1987, pp. 637.

24. A. J . J acobs and G. P. Wozaldo, Radiation Effects on the Stress Corrosion and Other Selected
Properties of Type 304 and Type 316 Stainless Steels, Proceedings of the Third International
Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Reactors, American
Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, 1987, p. 673.

25. PWR Reactor Coolant System License Renewal Industry Report, Project RP 2643-32, Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, May 1992.

26. S. Yukawa, Review and Evaluation of the Toughness of Austenitic Steels and Nickel Alloys
after Long-Term Elevated Temperature Exposures, WRC Bulletin 378, Welding Research
Council, New York, NY, J anuary 1993.

27. D. Peckner and I. M. Bernstein, Eds., Handbook of Stainless Steels, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1977.

28. System Material Analysis Department Report on the Evaluation of Material from Dresden Unit
2 Reactor Head Closure Studs, CECo Document M-03166-93, Commonwealth Edison
Company, Chicago, IL, May 1993.

29. Not Used.

30. BWR Water Chemistry Guidelines2000 Revision, EPRI, Palo Alto, TR-103515-R2,
February 2000.
1

31. EPRI NP-3944 Erosion/Corrosion in Nuclear Plant Steam Piping: Causes and Inspection
Program Guidelines, April 1985.

32. Sandia National Laboratories, Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power
Plants - Heat Exchangers, Contractor Report No. SAND93-7070; UC-523, J une 1994.

33. Roff, W. J ., Fibres, Plastics, and Rubbers: A Handbook of Common Polymers, Academic Press
Inc., New York, 1956.

34. Engineered Materials Handbook, Volume 2: Engineering Plastics, American Society for Metals
(ASM) International, Copyright 1988.

35. Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1, EPRI
1002950, J uly 2003.

36. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants, EPRI TR-106611, Revision 1, 1998

37. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13: Corrosion, American Society of Metals (ASM)
International, Copyright 1987.

38. Revie, R. W. Ed., Uhligs Corrosion Handbook, Second Edition, J ohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York, 2000.

39. Engineered Materials Handbook Desk Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM)

40. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 11: Failure Analysis and Prevention, American
Society of Metals (ASM) International, Copyright 1986.

41. Materials Handbook, Fourteenth Edition, Brady, Clauser and Vaccari, McGraw-Hill,
Copyright 1997.

42. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 19, Fatigue and Fracture, American Society of Metals


43. J ames R Varner, Fatigue and Fracture Behavior of Glasses, from Metals Handbook, Vol. 19,
Corrosion, 9th Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM) International, Copyright 2002.

44. Donald E Duvall, Effect of Environment on the Performance of Plastics, from Metals
Handbook, Vol. 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, 9th Edition, American Society for Metals

45. M.G. Fontana and R.W. Staehle, Advances in Corrosion Science and Technology - Volume 5,
Plenum Press, Copyright 1976.

46. PWR Secondary Water Chemistry Guideline: Revision 5, EPRI, Palo Alto, TR-102134,
December 1999.
1

47. Recommendations of an Effective Flow-Accelerated Corrosion Program, EPRI, Palo Alto,
CA, NASC-202L-R2, April 1999.

48. Closed Cooling Water Chemistry Guideline, TR-107396, Revision 1, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
2004 (1007820).


Appendix B - Raw Water

Raw water is defined as water that enters a plant from a river, lake, well, pond, ocean, or bay and
that has not been demineralized. In general, the water has been rough-filtered to remove large
particles and may contain a biocidal additive for control of micro-organisms, zebra mussels, and
Asiatic clams. Sodium chloride content is below 1000 mg/l for fresh water; above that for saltwater.
Raw water is typically used for the condenser circulating water system, nuclear grade service water
system, and the plant fire protection system. Other applications include containment cooling,
essential area cooling, component cooling water (more prevalent in the BWR industry), diesel
generator cooling and jacket water, and decay heat removal cooling. These systems contain a
variety of materials including stainless steel, nickel-base alloys, carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast
iron, copper and copper alloys (brasses, bronzes, copper-nickel), titanium and titanium alloys,
aluminum and aluminum alloys, and non-metals such as glass, plastics, and elastomers.

Water that has been previously treated but collects in drains and sumps, potentially with other
contaminants, is not chemistry controlled. This untreated water may also be considered to be raw
water.

Raw Water-Appendix B

Raw Water-Appendix B i
CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
2. MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENT ............................................ 2-1
2.1 Materials..............................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Environment .......................................................................................................2-2
3. AGING EFFECTS........................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Loss of Material ..................................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 General Corrosion................................................................................................3-1
3.1.2 Selective Leaching...............................................................................................3-3
3.1.3 Galvanic Corrosion...............................................................................................3-4
3.1.4 Crevice Corrosion.................................................................................................3-6
3.1.5 Pitting Corrosion..................................................................................................3-6
3.1.6 Erosion and Cavitation Erosion............................................................................3-8
3.1.7 MIC......................................................................................................................3-9
3.1.8 Macrofouling (Biofouling).................................................................................3-10
3.1.9 Wear and Fretting...............................................................................................3-11
3.1.10 Exfoliation Corrosion.........................................................................................3-11
3.2 Cracking............................................................................................................3-11
3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage..............................................................................................3-11
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking..................................................................................3-12
3.2.3 Fatigue................................................................................................................3-17
3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness...................................................................3-17
3.3.1 Hydrogen Embrittlement....................................................................................3-17
3.3.2 Thermal Aging...................................................................................................3-17
3.3.3 Radiation Embrittlement....................................................................................3-17
3.4 Distortion...........................................................................................................3-18
3.5 Fouling/Silting...................................................................................................3-18
3.6 Material Loss/Change in Properties/Cracking Non-Metals......................3-18
3.7 Summary of Potential Aging Effects ..............................................................3-19
3.8 Operating History.............................................................................................3-20
3.8.1 NPRDS / EPIX Review......................................................................................3-20
3.8.2 NRC Generic Communications..........................................................................3-25
4. FLOW DIAGRAM/SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT..... 4-1
4.1 Assumptions ........................................................................................................4-1
4.2 Overview..............................................................................................................4-2
4.3 Tool Description .................................................................................................4-3
4.3.1 Stainless Steel, Titanium and Titanium Alloys, and Nickel-Base Alloys............4-3
4.3.2 Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron.....................................................4-3
4.3.3 Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys.....................4-4
4.4 GALL Comparison.............................................................................................4-5
5. REFERENCES ................................................................................ 5-1

Raw Water-Appendix B ii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1 PWR NPRDS / EPIX Service Water System Failures...................................3-23
Figure 2 BWR NPRDS Raw Water System Failures...................................................3-24
Figure 3 Raw Water / Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloys, and Titanium and
Titanium Alloys Tool.....................................................................................4-18
Figure 4 Raw Water / Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron Tool.................4-19
Figure 5 Raw Water / Copper and Copper Alloys, and Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys Tool ..................................................................................4-20

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 3-1 NPRDS Search Summary for PWRs............................................................3-23
Table 3-2 NPRDS Search Summary for BWRs............................................................3-24
Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloys,
and Titanium and Titanium Alloys..................................................................4-7
Table 4-2 Aging Effects Summary - Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron....4-11
Table 4-3 Aging Effects Summary - Copper and Copper Alloys,
and Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys...........................................................4-13

Raw Water-Appendix B iii

1. INTRODUCTION

The Raw Water Tool provides a logic and methodology where selected materials subjected to a raw
water environment may be evaluated to identify applicable aging effects. The Raw Water Tool may
be applied when evaluating the pressure boundary integrity of the following components: pipe,
tubing, fittings, tanks, vessels, valve bodies and bonnets, pump casings, and miscellaneous process
components. Aging effects considered are loss of material, cracking, change in material properties
(e.g., reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), fouling, and loss of mechanical closure integrity.

Loss of mechanical closure integrity is not addressed in the Raw Water Tool, but is treated
separately in Appendix F. Aging effects for materials exposed to external environments that are not
continuously wetted or in a splash zone are addressed in Appendix E. Evaluation of heat exchangers
(and the related loss of heat transfer) is performed with the tool contained in Appendix G.
Evaluation of fatigue cracking is addressed with the Fatigue Tool in Appendix H.

This tool primarily addresses the combination of material and internal environment but can also be
used to evaluate the combination of material and external environment for components that are
submerged, such as in the spray pond (BWR) and intakes. The materials and environments covered
in the Raw Water Tool are discussed in Section 2.0. Aging effects that apply to the material and
environment combinations are discussed in Section 3.0. The development of the evaluation
flowcharts, and corresponding summary tables, for the various materials is presented in Section 4.0.

Raw Water-Appendix B 1-1


This tool provides a logic and methodology where mechanical components subjected to a raw water
environment can be evaluated to identify applicable aging effects. These mechanical components are
typically in high and low pressure service water systems, condenser circulating water systems,
reactor building cooling systems, auxiliary service water systems, and fire protection systems. Raw
water is also used in some plants to provide residual heat removal and diesel generator cooling.
Raw water includes all natural sources such as river, lake, well, brackish, and seawater.
Additionally, treated water potentially mixed with other fluids and/or contaminants in
area/equipment drains can be aggressive and is considered to be similar to raw water.

2.1 Materials

The materials evaluated in this tool are: (1) wrought and cast stainless steels, including weld metals
and cladding, (2) nickel-base alloys, including nickel-base alloy weld metal, (3) carbon and low-
alloy steels, including weld metals, (4) cast irons, (5) copper and copper alloys (brasses, bronzes,
copper-nickel), (6) titanium and titanium alloys, (7) aluminum and aluminum alloys, (8) non-
metals, and (9) protective coatings.

These materials are identical to those covered by the Treated Water Tool as described in
Section 2.1 of Appendix A. The Appendix A discussions on materials and material properties are
applicable for this Raw Water Tool also and are not repeated herein. However, a discussion of
protective coatings is provided below, which supplements the discussion in Section 2.1.9 of
Appendix A.

Protective Coatings
Some of the carbon steel vessels and tanks within the scope of license renewal contain organic
protective inner coatings. Other carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and cast iron applications in raw water
environments also can be coated or lined. Metallic underground piping containing salt or brackish
water is often concrete lined to provide corrosion protection. Organic based coatings such as coal
tar are used in moderately corrosive environments to provide protection for the base metal. This
type of coating is common where cast iron is the base metal and raw water is the environment. Not
all types of coatings and applications can be included in this mechanical tool logic because of the
various types of coatings and the diverse range of applications and environments encountered.

Failures of linings/coatings have occurred; however, these failures are typically caused by poor
original installation (see discussion for IN 85-024 included in Section 3.8.2 of this appendix) or
improper maintenance, rather than aging of the linings/coatings. The concern resulting from failure
of a lining/coating is aging of the underlying base material where the lining/coating failure has
occurred. Whether the failure results from improper maintenance, inadequate installation, or
another cause is not important if it does not result in failure of the base metal pressure boundary
function. Since failures have been identified in linings/coatings, it is incumbent on each plant to
assess the adequacy of any linings/coatings credited with preventing degradation of the base
material. Furthermore, the joints and seams of concrete-lined piping segments, mentioned above,
may without failure allow a small amount of raw water to come in contact with the base material.

As such, this tool does not evaluate the effects of aging on the various coatings and linings, but does
evaluate the aging effects which would otherwise result from contact of the base metal with the fluid
environment. However, if linings and coatings are credited by a specific plant with managing aging
effects, the lining/coating integrity must be assured. When plant programs or inspections are
credited with assuring the lining/coating integrity, these programs should be continued through the
extended period of operation and included as license renewal aging management programs for
which a plant-specific demonstration of aging management is to be provided as described in Section
4 of the main document.

2.2 Environment

Raw water consists of all natural sources of raw water, which includes river, lake, brackish, sea and
well water as well as potable water (city water) which is not chemistry controlled on-site. Raw
water is naturally oxygenated and contains varying amounts of impurities (e.g., chlorides, sulfates).
Microorganisms can cause microbiologically influenced corrosion. Most raw water is rough filtered
to remove large particles and is generally treated with biocide to control microorganisms and
macroorganisms. Hypochlorite is often added to raw water as a biocide, which increases the
potential for IGA, SCC, and pitting, galvanic, and crevice corrosion. Water that was previously
treated but that collects in drains and sumps, potentially with other contaminants, and is not
chemistry controlled is untreated water and may be considered as raw water.

Many of the aging effects discussed within this mechanical tool require some form of contaminant
(oxygen, chloride, ammonia, etc.) to become a significant aging concern. Raw water is a harsh
environment and, for the purposes of this Raw Water Tool, is assumed to contain contaminant levels
which are sufficiently high to promote these aging mechanisms. Even well water can contain levels
of natural contaminants such as calcium, iron, sulfate, etc., and when additional plant water
treatments are applied, can result in an aggressive environment.


3. AGING EFFECTS

The Raw Water Tool addresses aging effects that result from age-related degradation mechanisms.
Where specific mechanisms are not applicable under the environmental and material conditions
covered by this tool, justification is provided for a not applicable determination. For effects that
are applicable, a detailed discussion of the necessary environmental conditions is included. Aging
effects discussed below are loss of material, cracking, change in material properties (e.g., reduction
of fracture toughness, distortion), and fouling. Reduction of fracture toughness and distortion are
examples of a change in material properties for metals. Other changes in material properties are also
discussed, primarily for non-metals. When one or more of the aging mechanisms that could result in
the occurrence of an aging effect is determined to be plausible, then the associated aging effects are
considered to be applicable for the period of extended operation.

As described in Section 2.2, in many instances liners or coatings are applied to shield materials from
various degradation mechanisms. However, this tool considers the effect of the fluid environment
on the base material and does not credit the liner or coating for preventing an aging effect.


Aging mechanisms that can lead to loss of the metallic materials listed in Section 2.1 are general
corrosion, selective leaching, galvanic corrosion, crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, erosion and
cavitation erosion, and wear (including fretting). The applicability of each aging mechanism is
discussed in Sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.8, respectively.


material dissolution and sometimes corrosion product buildup [2], and the thinning generally
proceeds without appreciable localized attack [13]. At ordinary temperatures and in neutral or near
neutral media, oxygen and moisture are required for the corrosion of iron. Both oxygen and
moisture must be present because oxygen alone or water free of dissolved oxygen does not corrode
iron to any practical extent [3]. Carbon, low-alloy steels and cast iron are susceptible to general
corrosion in systems using raw or untreated waters. Whereas general corrosion is in many cases
predictable and can be accounted for by a corrosion allowance, pitting and crevice corrosion, on the
other hand, are more unpredictable [3, pg. 40] and a corrosion allowance may be more difficult to
calculate from a theoretical basis. However, trending of observed corrosion rates at each site can be
used to estimate the remaining life of the piping. Because of the uncertainty involved in
determining whether corrosion rates are within the bounds of corrosion allowances, this tool logic
identifies general corrosion as an applicable aging mechanism for susceptible materials where
oxygen and moisture may be present. This does not prevent users of this tool from crediting
corrosion allowances as a means of managing this aging effect; however, it is not appropriate to
generically exclude this aging effect based on corrosion allowances.

Since raw water is sometimes used in fire protection systems, the following information is presented
from Reference 21. The corrosion and scale buildup of metal sprinkler pipe is primarily a function
of the corrosiveness or aggressiveness of the water, the ambient environmental conditions, the
frequency of the introduction of fresh oxygen through system flushes, and the pipe material.
Chloride and chloride-containing ions are the most common cause of pitting. The Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report references a Battelle Laboratories study in which
56 specimens were taken from 41 installations located in various parts of the country for corrosion
testing to predict probable performance. Since fire protection systems are infrequently used, these
systems contain stagnant water for most of their lives. During system flushes, fresh water
containing oxygen is introduced. The discussion implies the oxygen is quickly used up to corrode
the pipe and, once consumed, no significant corrosion occurs until the next system flush. The report
further states that the corrosion forms a protective layer that retards additional pitting from occurring
during subsequent flushes. The report concludes that on the basis of examining the schedule 40
steel pipe specimens and extrapolation of the results to light-wall steel pipe, it can be estimated that
the light-wall pipe would provide satisfactory performance in most sprinkler systems up to and
exceeding 100 years. Each plant may want to consider the applicability of the Battelle study and
determine if their operation of the fire system would result in a lower expected rate of corrosion due
to the depletion of oxygen in the stagnant portions of the piping.

Stainless steel materials which contain at least 12% chromium and titanium/titanium alloys have
excellent resistance to general corrosion for all fluid applications except raw water. The chloride
content of the water affects the corrosion of stainless steel in raw water applications. However,
testing has shown that local pitting is approximately 200 times more severe than general corrosion
for Type 304 stainless steel in a flowing seawater environment (50 mil vs. 0.25 mil) [13, 14].
Nickel-base alloys have excellent resistance to corrosion in most environments. In a seawater
environment, the combination of chloride and biofouling deposits can produce severe localized
attack. This attack is predominantly in the form of crevice/pitting corrosion. Therefore for the
purposes of this tool, general corrosion of stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, and titanium and
titanium alloys will not be a significant aging mechanism since the dominant failure mode would be
from local pitting (or crevice corrosion in the case of titanium) rather than from loss of wall
thickness because of uniform general corrosion.

Copper and copper alloys are used when resistance to general corrosion is required. These copper
metals are used in atmospheric, fresh and salt water in place of other more susceptible metals such
as carbon steel or cast iron [1]. General corrosion of copper and copper alloys results from
prolonged contact with environments in which the corrosion rate is very low, such as fresh, brackish,
and salt waters. Other substances that cause uniform thinning at a faster rate include oxidizing
acids, sulfur-bearing compounds, NH
3
, and cyanides. Copper corrodes at negligible rates in
unpolluted air, water, and deaerated non-oxidizing acids [13]. Copper exhibits good resistance to
urban, marine, and industrial atmospheres and waters. Copper alloys are resistant to neutral and
slightly alkaline solutions with the exception of those containing ammonia, which causes stress
corrosion (discussed separately) and sometimes rapid general attack [5]. A patina forms on copper
and copper alloys from prolonged exposure, which gives the surface a weathered appearance.
However, due to the protective film which forms on the surface of copper and copper alloys
combined with the very low (negligible) corrosion rates in fresh, brackish, and salt waters, general

corrosion is not considered an aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys in a raw water
environment. An exception that requires plant-specific evaluation is the presence of ammonia in a
raw water environment, in which case the general attack of copper and copper alloys may be rapid
and result in a loss of function.

Aluminum and aluminum alloys are reactive metals, but develop an aluminum oxide coating that
protects them from corrosion in many environments. This film is quite stable in neutral and many
acid solutions but is attacked by alkalies [5]. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are resistant to
corrosion by many natural waters. Service experience with wrought aluminum and aluminum alloys
in marine (sea water) applications demonstrates their good resistance and long life under conditions
of partial, intermittent, or total immersion. Cast aluminum alloys also show high resistance to
seawater corrosion. Aluminum alloys that contain copper and are, therefore, least resistant to
seawater corrosion are generally not used unprotected. Thinning of aluminum and aluminum alloys
exposed to seawater by uniform (general) corrosion is negligible, the rate of corrosion is less than
5% of the rate for unprotected carbon steel in seawater, and corrosion is mainly of the pitting or
crevice type. Various correlations of the corrosivity of natural waters to aluminum (and its alloys)
have been attempted but none reliably predicts the corrosivity of all natural waters [13]. However,
the negligible uniform loss of wall thickness in seawater is considered to be the same or less for
natural waters, and the dominant failure mode of aluminum and aluminum alloys is localized rather
than uniform. Therefore, for the purposes of this tool general corrosion is not an applicable aging
mechanism for aluminum or aluminum alloys that are exposed to a raw water environment.


most common example is the selective removal of zinc in brass alloys (dezincification).
Dezincification is the usual form of corrosion for susceptible copper alloys in prolonged contact
with waters high in oxygen and carbon dioxide, and most often is associated with quiescent or
slowly moving solutions. Copper-zinc alloys containing greater than 15% zinc are susceptible to
selective leaching, while copper and copper alloys with a copper content in excess of 85% resist
dezincification. Yellow brass (30% zinc and 70% copper) and Muntz metal (40% zinc and 60%
copper) are both susceptible to selective leaching. The addition of small amounts of alloying
elements such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic, and antimony also inhibit dezincification [13, 5]. The
addition of 1% tin to brass, for example, decreases the susceptibility to selective leaching [13].
Naval brass is essentially an inhibited Muntz metal produced by the addition of 0.75% tin to the
40% zinc and 60% copper compound.

There are two general types of dezincification: uniform attack and localized plug attack. Slightly
acidic water, low in salt content and at room temperature, is likely to produce uniform attack,
whereas neutral or alkaline water, high in salt content and above room temperature, often produces
plug-type attack. In both types of dezincification the zinc ions stay in solution, while the copper
plates back on the surface of the brass. The dissolved zinc can corrode slowly in pure waters by the
cathodic ion reduction of water into hydrogen gas and hydroxide ions [5]. For this reason,

in the presence of oxygen. This process occurs in clean water, with no additional contaminant
required for initiation [5].

aluminum in a similar manner to the dezincification of brass [5]. Aluminum brasses are used to
prevent impingement attack where turbulent high velocity saline water is the fluid. These alloys form
a tough corrosion resistant protective coating due to the buildup of aluminum oxide. Proper quench
and temper treatments for some of the aluminum bronzes produce a tempered structure that is superior
in corrosion resistance to the normal annealed structures. This degradation effect has been noted
specifically in acid solutions; however, it was also noted that massive effects occurred where the
solution contained chloride ions [5]. Unless they are inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% arsenic,
aluminum brasses should be considered susceptible to selective leaching.

Gray cast iron can also display the effects of leaching particularly in relatively mild environments.
This process initiates with selective leaching of the iron or steel matrix from the graphitic network.
The graphite is cathodic to iron, providing a galvanic cell. The iron is dissolved, leaving a porous
mass consisting of graphite, voids, and rust. If the cast iron is in an environment that corrodes this
metal rapidly (e.g., saltwater), uniform corrosion can occur with a rapid loss of material strength
which can go undetected as the corrosion appears superficial [5].


the presence of a corrosive environment [5]. The rate of galvanic corrosion is affected by the
relative size of the anode to cathode. The material with the lower potential (higher on galvanic
series) is the anode and it sacrifices to the cathode. If the anode is appreciably larger than the
cathode, then the galvanic corrosion rate is slow. Conversely, if the anode is much smaller than the
cathode, then the galvanic corrosion rate can be very large in the presence of moisture and water.

Components within raw water systems may exhibit galvanic corrosion if carbon steels, low-alloy
steels, or cast iron materials are in contact with wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, titanium or
titanium alloys, or nickel-base alloys. (Cast iron and carbon steel are grouped together in the
galvanic series chart and will, therefore, demonstrate similar susceptibility to this aging effect.)
Galvanic corrosion can occur if cladding or organic protective internal coatings on tanks are flawed
such that dissimilar metals, which are electrically connected, are exposed to a corrosive
environment. Galvanic corrosion may also be a concern at raw water system interfaces where
stainless steel piping connects to systems using carbon steel, low-alloy steel, or cast iron fittings and
piping. In these instances, dissolution of the ferritic materials would occur preferentially since the
more corrosion resistant material (i.e., stainless steel or nickel-base alloy) acts as the cathode [5].
Therefore, wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, titanium and titanium alloys, and nickel-base
alloys are not susceptible to loss of material because of galvanic corrosion.

Generally the effects of galvanic corrosion are precluded by design (e.g., isolation to prevent
electrolytic connection or using similar materials). The raw water/carbon steel combination is
usually found in service water systems and condenser circulating water systems. In many plants, the
components in these systems have needed repair or replacement because of corrosion. In many

cases, the replacement material is stainless steel. Where cast iron is used in raw water systems and
is in contact with dissimilar metals, design features are typically included to control the rate of
corrosion. Heat exchangers, for example, may have sacrificial anodes and/or coatings where there is
contact between dissimilar materials. It is important in any aging management program to assure
that these design features are assured through the license renewal period (i.e., periodic sacrificial
anode replacement and coating verification).

Copper and copper alloys are in the middle of the galvanic series, with steel, alloy steel, and cast
iron being more anodic (or active) and the stainless steels, nickel alloys, and titanium and its alloys
being more cathodic (or passive). When coupled with the more anodic materials such as cast iron or
carbon steel, the copper and copper alloys would exhibit reduced corrosion effects, whereas the cast
iron or carbon steel would tend to exhibit increased corrosion. Conversely, when coupled to the
more cathodic materials such as stainless steel, titanium, or graphite, the copper and copper alloys
would demonstrate an increased susceptibility to corrosion [5, 13].

Under most environmental conditions frequently encountered in raw water service, aluminum and its
alloys are the anodes in galvanic cells with most other metals, protecting them by corroding
sacrificially. Only magnesium and zinc are more anodic. Contact of aluminum with more cathodic
metals should be avoided in any environment in which aluminum by itself is subject to pitting
corrosion. To minimize the corrosion of aluminum wherever contact with more cathodic metals
cannot be avoided, the ratio of exposed surface area of the aluminum to that of the more cathodic
metal should be as high as possible to minimize the current density. Corrosion of aluminum (and
aluminum alloys) in contact with more cathodic metals is much less severe in solutions of most
nonhalide salts, since the aluminum is not normally polarized to its pitting potential, than in
solutions of halide salts. Galvanic current between aluminum and another metal also can be reduced
by removing oxidizing agents from the electrolyte.

In summary, galvanic corrosion can occur in a corrosive environment (i.e., wetted locations provide
an electrolyte) where materials distant on the galvanic series chart are in contact. Corrosion of the
material with the lower potential will occur, with the corrosion rate dependent on the difference
between the electrochemical potentials of the two materials and the relative size of the anode to the
cathode. The fluid environment is a factor in determining the electrochemical potentials. Salt water
is a more corrosive environment than treated water and the electrochemical potential differences
between materials is typically much higher in salt water. Carbon steels, low-alloy steels, and cast
irons that are in contact with stainless, CASS, titanium and titanium alloys, or nickel-base alloys and
exposed to raw water (i.e., electrolytically connected) may be susceptible to galvanic corrosion.
Copper and copper alloys are also susceptible when coupled to a more cathodic stainless steel,
nickel-base alloy, titanium or graphite. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are susceptible if in contact
with any of the above materials in the presence of an electrolyte.

There are five major methods of eliminating or significantly reducing galvanic corrosion: 1)
selecting dissimilar metals that are as close as possible to each other in the galvanic series; 2)
avoiding coupling of small anodes to large cathodes; 3) insulating dissimilar metals completely
wherever practicable; 4) applying coatings and keeping them in good repair, particularly on the
cathodic member; and 5) using a sacrificial anodethat is, coupling the system to a third metal that
is anodic to both metals.


Crevice corrosion occurs in crevices or shielded areas that allow a corrosive environment to develop
within the crevice. The nature of crevices, especially for those very small in size, is such that low
flow or stagnant conditions can exist in the crevice regions even under system flowing conditions. It
such as gasket surfaces, lap joints, and under bolt heads where contaminants can concentrate [5].
Crevice corrosion can occur in the secondary or auxiliary systems in crevices, other areas of
stagnancy, and areas of deposit buildup [5]. In addition to stagnant conditions in the crevice, an
oxygen content in the fluid above 100 ppb is required to initiate crevice corrosion [6]. Although the
oxygen content in crevices can differ significantly from the bulk fluid oxygen levels due to oxygen
depletion, etc., a bulk fluid oxygen level or the presence of contaminants such as chlorides to sustain
the chemical reaction is necessary for the continued corrosion in the crevice [5]. Carbon steels, low-
alloy steels, cast iron, stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and
copper and copper alloys are all susceptible to some degree of crevice corrosion [13].

Titanium and titanium alloys are also susceptible to crevice corrosion although it requires significant
aqueous chloride contamination (>1000 ppm) at elevated temperatures (>160F) to be subject to
this attack [1]. With the exception of titanium and titanium alloys, the effect of temperature on
crevice corrosion is difficult to predict and no simple relationship has been found between
temperature and crevice attack in raw water environments [15].

Crevice corrosion is a potential aging mechanism for carbon and low-alloy steels in an oxygenated
raw water environment and where the crevice is subjected to stagnant or low flow conditions [6].
Cast iron and carbon steel undergo the same dissolution reaction [5]; therefore, cast iron (in its plain
form) is considered to have the same potential for crevice corrosion as carbon and low-alloy steel.
Also notoriously susceptible to attack by crevice corrosion (given a sufficiently narrow crevice in
the presence of oxygen) are stainless steels, aluminum or aluminum alloys, and other metals and
alloys that depend on oxide films or passive layers for resistance to corrosion [5].

Crevice corrosion of copper and copper alloys is a result of oxygen depletion in the crevices such
that crevice metal is anodic relative to the metal outside the crevice which is in an oxygen-bearing
environment [13]. For most copper and copper alloys, the location of the attack is generally outside
the crevice, immediately adjacent the crevice region. Crevices are present throughout piping and
equipment at connections, discontinuities in material, tube to tubesheet interfaces, etc. Corrosion
susceptibility is increased in these areas because of the crevice itself and the buildup of foreign
objects or debris such as dirt, pieces of shell, or vegetation [13]. It can also result from the
accumulation of sediment (silt), rust, permeable scales, or deposit of corrosion products at the
crevice location [13].


Reactive materials such as titanium exhibit excellent resistance to pitting corrosion. However, pitting
corrosion affects passive metals by attacking passive films in localized areas. Pitting corrosion occurs
in most commonly used metals and alloys including carbon and stainless steels as well as in many
copper alloys [3, 13]. Once a pit penetrates the passive film, galvanic conditions occur because the

metal in the pit is anodic relative to the passive film. Pitting corrosion rates are very unpredictable.
They can initially corrode at aggressive rates, then when corrosion by-products build up and the
oxygen is starved, the corrosion rate can slow down to almost zero. With stagnant or low flow
conditions, impurities such as halides remain in the pit and dissolution of the metal continues. Pitting
corrosion can be inhibited by maintaining an adequate flow rate, thus preventing impurities from
adhering to the material surface [3]. Low flow for raw water in a carbon steel system is defined to be
<3 fps [4]. For brackish or sea water in a stainless steel system, the low flow threshold is 5 fps
[3, 16]. Most pitting is associated with halide ions, with chlorides, bromides, and hypochlorites being
the most prevalent ions [5].

Another form of pitting corrosion can occur at a gas to fluid interface. This form of corrosion is

Stainless steels and nickel-base alloys are particularly susceptible to pitting attack because of the
passive nature of these alloys. Any localized attack tends to progress rapidly at the point of attack.
The localized pitting points are small anodic (active) areas that form an active-passive electrolytic cell
when connected to the much larger cathodic (passive) area. Pitting proceeds when the oxygen
concentration in the surrounding area serves as a depolarizer when compared to the oxygen depleted
area of the pit [13]. In seawater, the high chloride content and other contaminants increase the
corrosion rate. Although not totally impervious to pitting, molybdenum bearing stainless steels have
greatly increased pitting resistance over stainless steel with no molybdenum. Of the nickel-base
alloys, Hastelloy 276 and Inconel 625 are virtually immune to attack while Hastelloy G, Incoloy 825,
Monel 400, and Monel K-500 demonstrate excellent resistance [13].

Pitting is an applicable aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys as with most commercial
metals. This corrosive mechanism can occur either as localized attack, or generally over the entire
surface. Localized attack takes the form of various shapes and sizes and is typically concentrated at
surface locations where the protective film has been broken, and where non-protective deposits of
sediment, scale, dirt, or other substances are present [13]. General pitting attack takes the form of a
roughened and irregular appearance over the entire material surface. Pitting and crevice corrosion
are similar corrosion mechanisms, with crevice corrosion sometimes considered localized pitting in
a crevice. Where crevice corrosion occurs in crevices that can be stagnant even under flowing
conditions, pitting requires either low flow or stagnant conditions to sustain the corrosion reaction
[13]. While copper and copper alloys are generally resistant to pitting and crevice corrosion, copper
zinc alloys with greater than 15% zinc are susceptible. Aluminum bronze with greater than 8% Al
are considered susceptible to pitting in stagnant or low flow conditions.

Aluminum and aluminum alloys are passive (protected by an oxide film) in the pH range of about 4
to 8.5. For aluminum (and aluminum alloys), pitting corrosion is most commonly produced by
halide ions, of which chloride is the most frequently encountered in service. In the presence of
oxygen, the metal is readily polarized to its pitting potential. In the absence of oxygen or other
cathodic reactant, aluminum (and aluminum alloys) will not corrode by pitting because it is not
polarized to its pitting potential [13]. Also, ions of several metals can be reduced to metallic form
by aluminum. The more important heavy metals are copper, lead, mercury, nickel and tin. Copper

is the heavy metal most commonly encountered in applications of aluminum. A copper-ion
concentration of 0.02 to 0.05 ppm in neutral or acidic solutions is generally considered to be the
threshold value for initiation of pitting on aluminum [13]. Therefore, pitting corrosion is a potential
aging mechanism in stagnant or low flow conditions for aluminum and aluminum alloys that contain
any amounts of copper, lead, mercury, nickel or tin and are exposed to a raw water environment that
is outside the pH range of 4 to 8.5.

3.1.6 Erosion and Cavitation Erosion

Erosion
Erosion is the loss of material induced by flowing fluid. Raw water systems are particularly
susceptible to this mechanism since they usually contain large amounts of particulate. This
particulate in the fluid stream can impinge upon the surface of the metal and result in a loss of
material at that point. Regions that may be susceptible to this type of erosion include locations that
have high fluid velocities and flow discontinuities such as elbows and T-type joints/fittings. Lined
or coated components are susceptible to damage of the lining/coating under these conditions, which
results in corrosion potential for the base material in the eroded locations. Piping layouts such as
elbows, small radius changes of direction, and branch connections of 90-degrees are most
susceptible to flow-induced erosion [13]. Local deposition and macrofouling can produce localized
areas of high velocity or turbulence [12]. Vulnerable locations need to be evaluated for each
individual plant [8]. A review of the NPRDS data shows a number of failures clearly a result of
particle impingement. Discussions with the plants systems engineers also support the occurrence of
these types of failures in the service water systems whether they be erosion, impingement, or
cavitation. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, wrought austenitic stainless steel, CASS, copper
and copper alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and nickel-base alloys are all susceptible to
erosion [1, 5, 13].

In normal environments, the hard, tenacious TiO
2
surface film of titanium provides a superb barrier.
For this reason, titanium alloys can withstand flowing water and seawater velocities as high as 100
ft/s with insignificant metal loss [13]. Titanium alloys also exhibit relatively high resistance to
fluids containing suspended particles [13, 38]. Critical velocities for excessive metal removal
depend on the concentration, shape, size, and hardness of suspended particles in addition to fluid
impingement angle, local turbulence, and titanium alloy properties. The typical concentrations of
particles in seawater are of little consequence, but continuous exposure to high-velocity slurries of
hard particles can lead to finite metal removal [13]. As the raw water environments addressed in
this tool are not slurries of hard particles, erosion of titanium and titanium alloys is not considered
an applicable aging mechanism when exposed to raw water.

Cavitation Erosion
Cavitation erosion has occurred in service water systems, generally due to the improper operation of
pumps and valves [12]. This mechanism can also occur in stationary components such as orifices or
pressure reducing devices that were improperly designed. Cavitation is considered a design problem
which is detectable and correctable long before the license renewal period. Examples include
inadequate net positive suction head (NPSH) for pumps, too high a turndown for valves, or
operating at below vapor pressure for any component. Therefore, cavitation erosion is not
considered an applicable aging effect for the period of extended operation.

3.1.7 MIC

microbiological activity. MIC usually occurs at temperatures between 50 and 120F, however,
microbes can withstand a wide range of temperatures (15 to 210
o
F) [17]. These organisms have
been observed in mediums with pH values between 0 and 10.5 and under pressures up to 15,000 psi
[13]. Due to the number of different microorganisms involved in MIC and the wide array of
environments that can support the growth of microbiological activity, resultant corrosion can be
caused by many different chemical reactions or material property changes. Typically, MIC is
manifested as a localized loss of material similar to pitting type corrosion. The different types of
microbes can grow with or without oxygen and can thrive in many chemical environments. Some
anaerobic organisms reduce sulfate to sulfide ions, which influences both anodic and cathodic
reactions on iron surfaces [7, 13]. Several forms can metabolize NO
3
, which is used widely as a
corrosion inhibitor. These species produce many different byproducts which can accelerate
corrosion of certain alloys. Some aerobic organisms produce sulfuric acid by oxidizing sulfur or
sulfur-bearing compounds. The ammonium producing variety will increase the corrosion of copper
and copper alloys [13].

In general, microbiological organisms disrupt the metals protective oxide layer and produce
corrosive substances and deposit solids that accelerate the electrolytic reactions of corrosive attack,
generally in the form of pitting or crevice corrosion. MIC is facilitated by stagnant conditions,
biofouling, internal crevices, and contact with untreated water from a natural source. Laid up lines,
stagnant portions of systems containing raw water, and untreated connected systems are all
susceptible. The lack of treatment during stagnant conditions such as outages and equipment down
time, for systems normally treated, is a major problem at plants [13].

Nearly all nuclear plant materials of interest can be affected [11, 13]. MIC has deteriorated iron,
steel, stainless steel, copper, and copper alloys. In austenitic stainless steels, MIC preferentially
attacks welds and weld heat-affected zones (HAZs) for reasons as yet unclear. In the other materials
covered by this tool, MIC does not show such preference [13]. Titanium and nickel chrome alloys at
this time appear to show promise of MIC resistance, however, the data is insufficient to completely
rule this aging effect out for those materials.

There are several approaches that can be used to control MIC. The literature indicates that a high
pH (>10) will inhibit MIC and that MIC cannot survive high temperature (>210
o
F). In some cases
raising the pH may be an effective method of prevention and is included in this tool logic, however,
this approach in raw water systems would not appear to be cost effective. The most cost effective
and efficient method is to treat the raw water with a biocide such as ozone, chlorine, etc. Ozone has
been demonstrated to totally eliminate microorganisms with a 0.2 ppm concentration. Where ozone
is not appropriate, a chlorine concentration of 0.5 ppm has been demonstrated to be effective [13].
(Chlorine obviously may not be the chosen treatment in some systems because it promotes stress
corrosion cracking and pitting of stainless steel.) Maintaining fluid flow in a system is another
approach to controlling MIC. This is not as effective as using a biocide, for a number of reasons.
Although fluid velocities less than 2-3 ft/sec are most commonly associated with MIC, build up of
slime and bacteria in crevices can lead to MIC, despite high flow rates [17]. Raw water systems are
not operated continuously and, therefore, other means of MIC prevention during equipment and

system down time must be employed. For the purposes of this tool, raising the temperature and/or
maintaining fluid flow are not used as logic to prevent MIC. Raising the pH is assumed in the logic
to control MIC.

3.1.8 Macrofouling (Biofouling)

Both fresh water and sea water can sustain thousands of types of animal and plant life, including
barnacles, mussels, clams, algae, and others. These macro-organisms attach themselves to solid
surfaces during their growth cycle, and effectively seal off a small part of the surface from its
environment. This is termed fouling, or bio-fouling, and typically occurs within the first 2 or 3 days
of exposure to a raw water environment [34]. In terms of corrosion, the impacts of macrofouling are
similar to those of microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC), addressed in Section 3.1.7 above.
Discontinuous layers of macroorganisms may induce oxygen or chemical concentration cells that
lead to various types of localized corrosion, such as crevice and/or pitting corrosion [5, 31, 34].

Most metals that are susceptible to crevice and pitting corrosion in raw water, as described in
Section 3.1.4 and 3.1.5 above, are also susceptible to localized attack by attached macroorganisms.
However, aluminum and its alloys do not inhibit the growth of marine organisms but are impervious
to worms and borers, and the acids exuded from marine organisms are not corrosive [13]. Copper
compounds are toxic to barnacles, mussels, and other macroorganisms [34]. Copper alloys,
including the copper-nickels have long been recognized for their inherent resistance to marine
fouling. Research demonstrated that fouling was not observed on copper-nickel alloys containing
80% or more copper, and that only incipient fouling was noted on the 70Cu-30Ni alloy [13].
Aluminum bronzes have excellent resistance to brackish water, to clear and polluted sea, and to
many types of fresh water, but are subject to biofouling when the water velocity is less than 5 ft/s
[34]. Therefore, aluminum and aluminum alloys, copper, and copper alloys with greater than 80%
copper are not susceptible to a loss of material due to macrofouling (biofouling), except as noted.
Many of the more noble alloys (e.g., stainless steel, nickel-base alloys, etc.) have been known to foul
and pit deeply, whereas fouling is generally less on iron than on stainless steel after long exposure
periods [34]. However, as velocities reach the range of 3 to 6 ft/s in quiet seawater, macrofouling
diminishes and the pitting of the more noble alloys slows and even ceases [34].

Instances of macrofouling typically occur early in the service life of a component, and are corrected
well before the end of the initial license period. However, macrofouling is an applicable mechanism
for degradation of metals exposed to raw water if there is a potential for recurrence. As such,
macrofouling (i.e., localized attack such as crevice and/or pitting corrosion resulting from the
attachment and growth of macroorganisms) is considered to be an applicable aging mechanism for
carbon steel, cast iron, copper alloys with <80% Cu or >8% Al, low-alloy steel, nickel-base alloys,
stainless steel, and titanium and titanium alloys if there is a potential for macrofouling in the raw
water environment and velocities are less than 5 ft/s.

Fouling, including macrofouling and silting, is evaluated as an aging effect in Section 3.5.



Wear results from relative motion between two surfaces, from the influences of hard, abrasive
particles or fluid streams, and from small, vibratory or sliding motions under the influence of a
corrosive environment (fretting) [2]. Loss of material from erosion and cavitation erosion is
discussed in Section 3.1.6. Wear and fretting of external surfaces are addressed in Appendix E. The
following discussion explains why these mechanisms do not apply to this tool.

3.1.9.1 Wear

Wear can result from the movement of a material in relation to another material. This can occur
during a components performance of active functions which are not addressed by this tool (e.g.,
pump and valve operations). General wear is, therefore, not applicable for the equipment covered
by these tools.

3.1.9.2 Fretting

Fretting is caused by small amplitude vibratory motion [e.g., flow induced vibration (FIV)] which
results in removal of material between two contacting surfaces. With the exception of heat
exchangers, and external surfaces of mechanical equipment, passive components in the raw
water/carbon steel and stainless steel systems are not susceptible to this mechanism. Heat
exchangers and external surfaces are evaluated separately in Appendices G and E, respectively.
This mechanism is, therefore, not considered applicable in this tool.

3.1.10 Exfoliation Corrosion

Exfoliation is a form of localized corrosion that primarily affects aluminum alloys. Corrosion
proceeds laterally from the initiation sites on the surface and generally proceeds intergranularly
along planes parallel to the surface. The corrosion products that form in the grain boundaries force
metal away from the underlying base material, resulting in a layered or flakelike appearance. At
least one case affecting 6xxx series magnesium-silicon alloys in fresh water service has been
reported [13]. The intensity of exfoliation increases in slightly acidic environments or when the
aluminum is coupled to a cathodic dissimilar metal. Exfoliation is not accelerated by stress and does
not lead to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) [13]. Exfoliation corrosion is restricted in depth, and
therefore does not cause unexpected failure, as does SCC [13], and is not considered to be an
applicable mechanism for aluminum and aluminum alloys in raw water environments.

3.2 Cracking


degradation mechanisms of hydrogen blistering and embrittlement [2, 5]. Hydrogen damage usually
manifests itself as hydrogen embrittlement in high strength steels and hydrogen blistering in low
strength steels. Hydrogen blistering has been seen in low strength carbon and low-alloy steels in the

temperature range of 30 to 300
o
F [9]. Corrosion and the application of cathodic protection,
electroplating, and other processes are major sources of hydrogen in metals. Hydrogen blistering is
most prevalent in the petroleum industry, in storage tanks, and in refining processes [5]. A review
of the failure data for PWR and BWR raw water systems shows no evidence of hydrogen blistering;
therefore, it is considered not applicable for carbon and low-alloy steels in raw water systems.

Another term for hydrogen embrittlement is sulfide stress cracking if the cracking is due to the
strengths of less than 120 ksi for carbon, low-alloy steels, and cast iron, concern regarding hydrogen
cracking is alleviated except when the material is temper embrittled [2]. Since the yield strength of
most of the piping and components in the raw water applications is on the order of 30 to 45 ksi,
hydrogen embrittlement is considered not applicable for carbon and low-alloy steels. The yield
strength of even the hardest cast irons is less than 100 ksi, with plain cast irons in the same range as
that noted above for the carbon and low-alloy steel applications and therefore cast irons are not
susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement. Copper and copper alloys also have low yield strengths and
are considered not to be susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement. Only tough pitch copper alloys in a
reducing atmosphere are susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement [13]. The commonly used copper and
copper alloys, including those covered by this tool, are deoxidized and are not susceptible to SCC,
except as addressed in Section 3.2.2.

In most cases, austenitic stainless steels are immune to hydrogen damage although nickel-base alloy
may be somewhat susceptible [2, 3]. The industry literature has not identified any incidents of
hydrogen damage to stainless steels or nickel-base alloys. Therefore, hydrogen damage is
considered not applicable to stainless steels or nickel-base alloys in raw water.

Only recently has it been determined that hydrogen embrittles aluminum. Hydrogen damage occurs
occasionally in aluminum and aluminum alloys, but it is not a significant problem. When a high-
strength aluminum alloy is cathodically charged, its ductility is reduced [32]. Since hydrogen
damage is not a significant problem for aluminum and aluminum alloys, and the use of aluminum
and aluminum alloys is typically limited in nuclear plant raw water environments, hydrogen damage
is not considered to be an applicable aging mechanism for aluminum and aluminum alloys exposed
to raw water.


Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) is a type of corrosive attack that occurs through the combined
actions of stress (both applied and residual tensile stresses), a corrosive environment, and a
susceptible material. Highly stressed materials require less corrosive environments and highly
corrosive environments require less stress to initiate and propagate cracking. Elimination or
reduction in any of these three factors will decrease the likelihood of SCC occurring. SCC is either
intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) or transgranular stress corrosion cracking
(TGSCC), depending upon the crack path. These modes can be mixed or the mode can switch from
one to the other.

IGSCC is cracking along the grain boundaries of the material. It is typically associated with
materials containing excessive grain boundary carbide precipitation or impurity segregation.

Although IGSCC usually occurs in fluid with high dissolved oxygen (>100 ppb), it can occur in a
low oxygen environment. IGSCC is the predominate form of SCC in BWRs. Preferential grain
boundary precipitation of carbides in austenitic stainless steels and nickel-base alloys can lead to a
localized depletion of chromium in the vicinity of the grain boundary. This is known as sensitization
and is one of the mechanisms that promotes IGSCC.

Grain boundary segregation of impurities such as phosphorous, sulfur, and silicon is another
mechanism believed to promote IGSCC. It can produce a grain boundary chemical composition
with a significantly different electrochemical potential from that of the bulk alloy composition. The
effect of this electrochemical potential difference is an increase in corrosion susceptibility at the
grain boundaries.

TGSCC is characterized by cracks that propagate through (or across) the grains of the material.
Numerous metallurgical factors, such as crystal structure, grain size and shape, dislocation density
and geometry, and phase composition, affect TGSCC. It can occur in austenitic, duplex, martensitic,
and precipitation hardened stainless steels subjected to chlorides and oxygenated environments and
in the presence of caustic solutions.

Stresses in materials are generally categorized as either applied or residual stresses. Applied stresses
are the result of operating history and loadings, or stresses applied during fabrication as a result of
bolting, riveting, welding, bending, etc. Residual stresses are those stresses resulting from the actual
fabrication of the material and include cold working, tube drawing, spinning, tooling, etc. [13].
These stresses are very difficult to ascertain for any given component or material and this detailed
evaluation and identification of applied and residual stresses are beyond the scope of this tool. The
minimum level of stress required for SCC is dependent not only on the material but also on
temperature and the environment. Increasing the stress tends to decrease the time for cracking to
occur and, together with the specific temperature and environment to which a material is exposed,
makes it extremely difficult to identify a minimum threshold stress level for SCC. Therefore, it is
assumed that all austenitic stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, and copper and copper alloys
evaluated using these tools contain stresses sufficient to initiate SCC if subjected to a corrosive
environment. A discussion of the susceptibility of austenitic stainless steels, nickel-base alloys,
copper and copper alloys, titanium and titanium alloys, and carbon and low-alloy steels, as well as
aluminum and aluminum alloys, to SCC or IGA in a raw water environment is provided below.

Intergranular attack (IGA), also known as intergranular corrosion, is similar in some respects to
SCC; however, it is distinguished from SCC because stress is not necessary for it to proceed. IGA is
characterized by deterioration of grain boundaries without appreciable attack of adjacent grains.
That is, the rate of attack on grain boundaries greatly exceeds that of the matrix material. Generally,
materials and conditions that are susceptible to intergranular stress corrosion cracking will also be
susceptible to IGA. However, silicone bronze is a material that is susceptible to IGA yet is not
susceptible to SCC.

SCC of Wrought Austenitic Stainless Steel and CASS
Austenitic stainless steels with a sensitized microstructure are particularly susceptible to SCC in
oxidizing environments, although sensitization is not a requirement. The critical stress levels
required to cause cracking in a sensitized structure can be quite low; residual stresses are often

sufficient. A sensitized microstructure does not guarantee that SCC will occur, nor does an
unsensitized microstructure guarantee that SCC will not occur. At temperatures below 200
o
F,
intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) is not a concern for austenitic stainless steels in an
oxidizing water environment in the absence of chlorides and sulfates. In the presence of significant
chlorides, IGSCC in stainless steel can occur at room temperature [2].

The literature refers to a general rule of thumb for a threshold temperature for the onset of SCC in
water of 140
o
F [13, 25]. Industry data shows that sensitized Type 304 and Type 316 stainless steels
are vulnerable to chloride cracking even at ambient temperatures [15, 18, 20]. Survey data suggests
no safe level of chloride concentration below which cracking will not occur and, with a harsh enough
environment, SCC can occur in austenitic stainless steel at ambient temperature. However, the
probability of failure in water with chloride levels less than 1 ppm is low [18] and the NPRDS
industry failure data does not support a problem with SCC of stainless steels in a raw water
environment.

The use of low carbon and stabilized grades of austenitic stainless steels, or solution heat treatment
at 1800
o
F to 2100
o
F can be effective in minimizing intergranular attack at welds. The use of low
carbon grades such as type 304L has given superior performance in environments where other
grades have exhibited knife-line attack [15].

In general, nickel-base alloys are more resistant to SCC in the presence of impurities and
oxygenated water than are austenitic stainless steels. SCC of nickel-base alloys has been found to
occur in types of environments that include high-temperature halogen ion solutions and high-
temperature waters. Virtually every nickel-base alloy is susceptible to SCC in chloride solutions if
the proper conditions exist. Unlike common stainless steels, the conditions that promote SCC in
nickel-base alloys are much more severe. SCC is promoted by various parameters in aqueous halide
systems that include the following: elevated temperatures, especially above 400F; high chloride
(Cl
-
) contents in the percent range; acidity, usually in the range pH < 4; aeration or presence of other
oxidizing species [13]. However, it is conservatively assumed that the threshold values of impurities
for austenitic stainless steels apply to nickel-base alloys. The high temperature conditions necessary
for SCC in nickel-base alloys (e.g., > 400F) are not experienced in nuclear power plant raw water
environments. Therefore, SCC of nickel-base alloys is not an applicable aging mechanism in raw
water environments.

SCC of Copper and Copper Alloys
While commercially pure copper is not susceptible to stress corrosion cracking, some copper alloys
are susceptible to SCC in the raw water environments encountered in nuclear plants. The necessary
ingredients for SCC in copper alloys, as for all metals, are sustained stress in conjunction with a
specific degradation environment and/or chemical substance. Where chlorine is the common
contaminant associated with SCC of stainless steel, chlorine does not promote SCC in copper alloys.
The necessary chemical substance for SCC to occur in copper alloys is ammonia (NH
3
) and
ammonium salts. These chemical substances are often used in raw water systems to control the fluid
pH or can be present as a result of an ammonium based cleaning solvent. Ammonia is also present
in the atmosphere and raw water supplies as a by-product of organic decay, as a by-product of MIC
(as described in Section 3.1.7), possibly from fertilizers used in certain rural areas. In addition to

ammonia or ammonium salts, oxygen and moisture (e.g., an aqueous solution) are required to
promote SCC in the copper alloys. Other contaminants such as carbon dioxide may increase the rate
of cracking [13, 33].

Copper alloys containing greater than 15% zinc are highly susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking.
The best-known example of stress corrosion cracking is probably the season cracking of yellow
brass ammunition shells in a moist ammonia environment [3, 5]. Brass alloys containing less than
15% zinc exhibit almost no susceptibility to SCC. Conversely, brasses containing 20 to 40% zinc
demonstrate high susceptibility to SCC with susceptibility increasing as the zinc content is
increased. Inhibited copper alloys produced by the addition of small amounts of other alloying
elements (e.g., Sn, As, etc.) have demonstrated increased resistance to selective leaching; however,
these inhibited alloys do not appear to provide an increased resistance to SCC [13]. All copper
alloys (both brasses and bronzes) containing in excess of 15% zinc should be considered susceptible
to SCC regardless of any added inhibiting elements.

Bronze (copper-tin alloys), copper-nickel, and copper-silicon alloys are considerably more resistant
to stress corrosion cracking than the copper-zinc (brass) alloys [3, 5]. These alloys are not
considered susceptible to SCC/IGA for this raw water tool. Aluminum bronze (>8% Al), however,
has exhibited high susceptibility to SCC in a moist ammonia environment [13].

Intergranular corrosion of copper alloys does not occur frequently; however, when it does occur it is
usually associated with high-pressure steam environments. The effects of this degradation
mechanism are similar to SCC except that mechanical stress is not required to initiate the
intergranular corrosion [13]. Typically the alloys that are susceptible to SCC are also susceptible to
intergranular corrosion. These include Muntz metal, admiralty metal, yellow brass, commercial
bronze, and aluminum brasses. One exception to the inclusion rule appears to be silicon bronze
alloys, which are resistant to SCC but do demonstrate a susceptibility to intergranular corrosion
[13]. Since raw water environments do not include high pressure steam, and the aging effects for
IGA and SCC are similar, this tool logic does not differentiate between IGA and SCC.

As such, even small amounts of ammonia in combination with oxygen and water can cause cracking
of certain copper alloys, whereas other alloys are immune. Also, the presence of ammonia or
ammonium salts is not generally expected in the raw water environments addressed by this tool.
Therefore, SSC/IGA is not an applicable aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys exposed to
a raw water environment, unless plant-specific operating experience indicates the presence of
ammonia or ammonium salts (such as for pH control, in a cleaning solvent, as a result of organic
decay or fertilizers, or as a by-product of MIC). SCC/IGA may be an applicable aging mechanism
for certain copper alloys (brasses with >15% Zn or aluminum-bronzes with >8% Al) that are
exposed to raw water if plant-specific operating experience indicates the presence of ammonia or
ammonium salts in the water.

SCC of Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels
The literature shows that SCC of carbon and low-alloy steels is possible in aqueous chlorides. One
of the most reliable methods of preventing SCC of carbon and low-alloy steels in aqueous solutions
is to select a material with a yield strength of less than 100 ksi [19]. The yield strength of carbon
steels typically used in raw water systems is in the order of 30 to 45 ksi. Although SCC of carbon

steel has been reported, SCC of carbon steels in raw water applications is not an identified problem
based on industry data and utility surveys. Nitrate induced SCC of carbon steel in a treated water
system can occur with nitrate concentrations around 10,000 ppm, if microbial activity converts
nitrite-based corrosion inhibitors, as described in Appendix A. For the purposes of this tool, SCC of
carbon and low-alloy steels is not considered a plausible nuclear plant aging mechanism in raw
water systems.

SCC of Titanium and Titanium Alloys
Grades 1, 2, 7, 11, and 12 of titanium and its alloys are virtually immune to SCC except in a few
specific environments (such as anhydrous methanol/halide solutions, red fuming nitric acid (HNO
3
),
and liquid cadmium), none of which are applicable in raw water systems. Other titanium and
titanium alloys have been found to be susceptible to SCC in additional environments, most notably
aqueous chloride solutions. However, this susceptibility is seldom observed in actual field
applications [13].

Seawater at ambient temperatures has been known to promote SCC in various titanium alloys, and
of unalloyed titanium (with high oxygen content). In addition to the environmental effects, the
metallurgical condition of a particular titanium alloy will influence its susceptibility to SCC. In
general, titanium alloys with higher aluminum, oxygen, and tin content are the most susceptible to
SCC, whereas molybdenum is usually beneficial in increasing SCC resistance. In binary titanium-
aluminum alloys, it has been established that 5% Al is necessary for SCC to occur in aqueous
environments. Binary titanium-oxygen alloys also exhibit a critical level of oxygen below which
SCC does not occur. This level is generally taken as less than 0.20 to 0.25% [13]. For example,
alloys containing more than 6% Al are especially susceptible to rapid crack propagation in seawater.
Tin, manganese, cobalt, and oxygen have adverse effects, but stabilizers such as molybdenum,
niobium, or vanadium reduce or eliminate susceptibility to cracking [33].

Therefore, for the purposes of this tool, SCC of titanium and its alloys is considered an applicable
aging mechanism in sea and/or brackish raw water systems if the titanium alloy is not ASTM grade
1, 2, 7, 11, or 12 and contains more than 5% aluminum or more than 0.20% oxygen, or any amount
of tin.

High-purity and commercially pure aluminum and the relatively low-strength aluminum alloys are
not susceptible to SCC [33]. However, aluminum alloys containing more than 12% zinc or more
than 6% magnesium are very susceptible to cracking under mild corrosive environments [16]. Only
aluminum alloys that contain appreciable amounts of soluble elements (primarily copper,
magnesium, silicon, and zinc) are susceptible to SCC. However, for most commercial alloys,
tempers have been developed that provide a degree of immunity to SCC in most environments.
Research indicates that water or water vapor is the key environmental factor to produce SCC in
aluminum alloys. Halide ions (chlorides being the most important) have the greatest effects in
accelerating the attack. In general, susceptibility is greater in neutral solutions than in alkaline
solutions, and is greater still in acidic solutions. Alloys of the 2xxx, 5xxx, 6xxx, and 7xxx groups of
wrought aluminum alloys are susceptible to SCC. Resistance of other wrought alloys and cast
alloys, except for 3xx.x and 7xx.x, is sufficiently high that cracking rarely occurs in service [13].


3.2.3 Fatigue

Cracking due to fatigue is discussed in Appendix H.


3.3.1 Hydrogen Embrittlement

With the exception of titanium and titanium alloys, materials in raw water environments are not
subject to hydrogen damage/embrittlement as described in Section 3.2.1. Titanium has
demonstrated a tendency toward hydrogen embrittlement although a mechanism for the generation
of atomic hydrogen must be present. This could include the titanium in contact with a corroding
metal (galvanic couple) or an excessive impressed cathodic current. Additionally, the metal
temperature must be greater than 175F and the solution pH must be outside the 3 to 12 range. The
dissolved hydrogen reacts to form a brittle hydride compound which results in the loss of ductility
and tensile strength [13]. Avoiding any of the above conditions will prevent hydrogen embrittlement
of titanium and titanium alloys [13].

3.3.2 Thermal Aging

Thermal aging is a time and temperature dependent mechanism where microstructural changes lead
to increased yield and tensile strength properties, decreased ductility, and degradation of toughness
properties. Cast austenitic stainless steels [23] and precipitation-hardenable stainless steels [24] are
known to be susceptible to thermal aging at temperatures of 600-650
o
F and it has been projected that
it can occur at temperatures as low as 550
o
F when exposures are long. The temperature range for
embrittlement of these materials is typically between 700-1000
o
F [25]. Thermal aging of carbon
steels and cast iron is not significant under the conditions of BWR or PWR operation [13, 26].
Copper alloys in general demonstrate good fatigue resistance and at the raw water temperatures to
which they are subjected, thermal aging is not a concern [13]. Since raw water temperatures are
well below the threshold temperatures required to cause thermal aging and embrittlement, these
aging mechanisms are not considered applicable to the materials within the scope of this mechanical
tool.


Radiation embrittlement can result in a decrease in fracture toughness of metals; however, the neutron
exposure of components and systems using a raw water/carbon steel or stainless steel application is
much less than the neutron fluence required to cause radiation embrittlement [2]. Therefore, radiation
embrittlement is considered not applicable.


3.4 Distortion

Distortion may be caused by plastic deformation due to temperature-related phenomena (e.g., creep).
In general, distortion is addressed by the design codes and is not considered an applicable aging
effect. Creep is not a plausible aging mechanism since the high temperatures required for this
mechanism to occur (generally at temperatures >40% of the alloy melting point) are not observed in
nuclear plant systems.

3.5 Fouling/Silting

Water-borne deposits, commonly known as foulants, are loose, porous, insoluble materials
suspended in water. They include such diverse substances as particulate matter, migrated corrosion
products, sediment, etc. Deposits may be organic, inorganic, or a mixture of the two. Scales are
crystalline deposits that precipitate in a system. In addition to their impact as a mechanism for
corrosion (loss of material) described in Sections 3.1.4, 3.1.5, and 3.1.8, foulants can accumulate in
equipment and piping and impede heat transfer or fluid flow [13]. Fouling, as well as silting, may
prevent (or impede) the performance of intended functions and is, therefore, considered to be an
applicable aging effect for components exposed to raw water. Reduction (loss) of heat transfer,
either through flow restriction or the insulating properties of the foulant, is applicable only to heat
exchangers and is addressed in Appendix G.

Flow restriction may be an issue for spray and sprinkler nozzles, but is not considered to be an age-
related effect. Operating experience has shown that cases of fouling, silting, and/or corrosion
product buildup occur well before the end of the initial license period of 40 years. The user of this
document should review the latest industry developments with respect to treatment of flow
restriction as an aging affect.

3.6 Material Loss/Change in Properties/Cracking Non-Metals

Non-metals such as glass, plastic (thermoplastic), elastomers, and concrete, that may be used in
nuclear power plant raw water systems (such as for sight glasses, flow/level meters, piping, sealants,
etc.), exhibit different responses to age-related degradation than do metals. As described in Section
3.6 of Appendix A of these tools, degradation of glasses and thermoplastics in nuclear plant water
systems is not expected based on industry operating experience and the assumption of proper
material selection and application. Factors related to passive aging that may contribute to the
degradation of glass are high temperature water, hydrofluoric acid, and the caustic alkalies [3], none
of which are applicable in typical raw water systems. The factors related to passive aging that may
contribute to the degradation of thermoplastics (e.g., PVC, PVDF) include ultraviolet (UV) radiation
(photooxidation) and chemical degradation through hydrolysis, elevated temperature exposure, and
oxidation reactions with a solvent. Certain polymer (plastic) types are more susceptible than others
to specific degradation mechanisms, but all polymers can be degraded by a least one mechanism
[35]. As such, assuming proper selection for the limited use of plastics in raw water service, the
plastic will be resistant by design, and degradation is not expected during the extended operating
period.

For additional information on the properties and failure susceptibilities of glass and plastic
(thermoplastics and thermosets), the user of this tool is referred to Volume 4, Ceramics and
Glasses, and Volume 2, Engineering Plastics, of the Engineered Materials Handbook published
by ASM International, copyright 1991 and 1988 respectively. Alternatively, the ASM Engineered
Materials Handbook is available in a desk edition, copyright 2003 [36].

With respect to concrete-lined piping, the logic of this tool evaluates the effects on the base material
of contact with the fluid medium, due to the potential for the piping material to be exposed to some
amount of raw water at the seams/joints of piping segments. The aging effects for concrete exposed
to raw water are addressed in EPRI report 1002590 (successor to TR-114881), Aging Effects for
Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [37], which can be used for the
evaluation of the majority of any concrete-lined piping in raw water service. Aging effects for
elastomers exposed to fluids are likewise addressed in the Structural Tools.


The previous sections discuss various potential aging mechanisms and their applicability within the
bounds of the specific material and environment combinations covered by this tool. Aging
mechanisms that are deemed plausible (i.e., that require evaluation) because conditions exist that
exceed established thresholds or where thresholds are not defined are identified as applicable aging
mechanisms along with the associated aging effect(s). The applicable aging effects described in
the previous sections for the raw water environments addressed by this tool are categorized as loss
of material, cracking, and reduction of fracture toughness.

The aging effects evaluation shows that a loss of material is the only aging effect category
applicable to carbon steel, low-alloy steels, and cast iron in a nuclear plant raw water environment.
Loss of material includes general corrosion, crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, MIC, corrosion in
the presence of macroorganisms/silt, galvanic corrosion, erosion, and selective leaching. (Selective
leaching is included in this category even though the aging effect is loss of material structural
integrity versus wall thinning.) Loss of material strength and properties due to selective leaching is
a concern for gray cast iron unless the material is coated or lined. Due to the aggressiveness of this
environment, many of these forms of corrosion can occur either individually or in combination with
other mechanisms.

Stainless steel, titanium and titanium alloys, and nickel-base alloys have two applicable aging effect
categories in a raw water environment: loss of material and cracking. Also, reduction of fracture
toughness (due to hydrogen embrittlement) is an applicable aging effect for titanium and titanium
alloys. Although resistant to general corrosion and galvanic corrosion, the stainless steels, titanium
and titanium alloys, and nickel-base alloys are more susceptible to localized corrosion (i.e., crevice
and/or pitting corrosion, MIC, and corrosion in the presence of macroorganisms/silt), particularly in
a raw water environment. The stainless steels and nickel-base alloys are more resistant than other
materials to erosion but are still considered susceptible to material loss. Additionally, the
contaminants present in raw water make cracking due to SCC and IGA an applicable aging
effect/mechanism for stainless steels and titanium/titanium alloys.


Copper and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys exhibit similar types of aging effects
(i.e., material loss and cracking) to stainless steels and nickel-base alloys. While resistant to general
corrosion, localized corrosion of copper and aluminum alloys is a concern, although there are many
copper alloys that demonstrate high resistance to these mechanisms. Several copper alloys are very
susceptible to selective leaching of either zinc or aluminum. This effect occurs in uninhibited
brasses and bronzes with greater than 15% zinc content and in aluminum bronzes with greater than
8% aluminum content. Stress corrosion cracking and IGA are also applicable aging mechanisms in a
raw water environment for certain copper alloys, in the presence of ammonia, and for aluminum
alloys.

There is a contrast in how aging effects are manifested on components. Programs that are credited
with managing aging predominantly focus on these effects and not on the aging mechanisms
themselves, so it is important that the relationship between the aging mechanisms and the effects
are identified. As an example, the loss of material resulting from general corrosion is uniform,
whereas it is localized for the other corrosion mechanisms. This may be an important factor in
determining the effectiveness of detection and management programs as described in Section 4 of
the main document. For example, with uniform corrosion, the wall thinning can lead to gross failure
(although the rate is very slow and usually predictable). With localized loss of material, the material
loss is concentrated, with relatively small material weight loss leading to a through-wall failure
(although the rate can be very fast and unpredictable). Through-wall failures associated with
localized corrosion are generally pin-hole type leaks, which allows time for leak detection before
impairing component or system function.


An operational history review was performed using NPRDS (later EPIX) and review of NRC
generic communications that apply to raw water systems. Each is reported below.


The operating plant experience databases reviewed were the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System
(NPRDS) and its replacement, the Equipment Performance and Information Exchange System
(EPIX). There are several concerns and/or precautions regarding the use of this data; however, the
informative nature of the data outweighs the recognized limitations.

For the NPRDS database query, the following search conditions were selected:

Selected Safety Classes are Safety-related Components, Nonsafety-related Components, and
Other

Selected Failure Cause Categories are Age/Normal Usage, Unknown, and Other

Excluded Corrective Action is Recalibrate/Adjust


Selected NSSSs are Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Westinghouse, and
General Electric

Selected Systems are Low Pressure Service Water-BW; Nuclear Service Water-CE;
Nuclear Service Water-Westinghouse; Essential Service Water-GE; and Diesel Cooling
Water-GE

Selected Components are ACCUMU, FILTER, PIPE, PUMP, VALVE, and VESSEL

Excluded PIPE Failure Mode is Plugged Pipe

Excluded PUMP Failure Mode is Failed to Start

Excluded VALVE Failure Modes are Failed to Close, Failed to Open, Internal Leakage, Fail
to Operate Properly, Fail to Operate as Required, Premature Opening, and Fail to Remain
Open

Selected Failure/Cause Descriptions are Foreign Material/Substance, Particulate
Contamination, Normal Wear, Welding Process, Abnormal Stress, Abnormal Wear,
Mechanical Damage, Aging/Cyclic Fatigue, Dirty, Corrosion, Binding/ Sticking, Mechanical
Interference, Environmental Condition, and Other

As the EPIX search was conducted for Revision 3 of these tools, the above NPRDS search
conditions were matched as close as possible for the EPIX queries. Although the EPIX search
conditions are not an exact match for the NPRDS conditions, a conservative approach was taken
when determining the appropriate search conditions. There were 1448 records meeting the search
condition(s) for PWR plants and 937 records meeting the search condition(s) for the BWR plants.
These records were reviewed and those involving consumables such as failed/worn gaskets or
packing materials were manually excluded. Also excluded were entries such as worn pump
impellers, bearings, seat leakage, valve internals damage, and clogged filters. The remaining
records numbered 298 for PWRs and 209 for BWRs, which were considered equipment aging issues
applicable to the licensing renewal scope of components. The number of records and the percentage
of total were tabulated in the following Tables 3-1 and 3-2. The NPRDS / EPIX data and
observations are reported separately for the PWRs and BWRs. The reason is that the searches were
done at different times and not because significant differences in results were expected between
PWR and BWR raw water systems. The following items are observations from a review of the data.

1. There appears to be no conformity among the plants in reporting Service Water System data.

2. The failure descriptions and cause descriptions often are too vague to evaluate.

3. The causes of many failures seem to be misdiagnosed (for example, attributing failures to
normal wear when the failure description clearly points to pitting or some other form of
corrosion often occurring over a short period of time). Several of the erosion entries, especially
those occurring downstream of throttle valves, were probably due to cavitation. Many of the

erosion entries involved erosion or deterioration of a lining/coating which then exposed the base
material to another form of corrosion mechanism such as pitting, crevice, or MIC.

4. Although Service Water Systems are normally considered to be primarily carbon steel systems,
over 16% of the failure entries were either Type 304 or Type 316 stainless steels. This indicates
that the systems or portions of systems were either originally designed using stainless steels or
that a material substitution from carbon to stainless is occurring, or both. In any case, the data
show that stainless steels are not immune to many corrosive effects.

5. All the potential effects identified by the Raw Water Tool appear in the NPRDS / EPIX data
with the exception of SCC of stainless steels. See the discussion in Section 3.2.2

6. Figure 1 depicts the number of failures by year. It shows an increasing trend beginning in the
mid-80s, peaking at 48 failures in 1990, then rapidly decreasing to negligible failures between
1991 and 1995. The lack of data in the 70s is probably due to poor reporting practices before
the NPRDS became the responsibility of INPO in 1981. The large increase in failures in the
late 80s could have prompted the issue of Generic Letter 89-13 on Service Water System
problems. It is also possible that the issue of GL 89-13 could have focused attention on the
problems and promoted a more rigorous reporting practice. Assuming the reporting practices
did not change significantly between the mid-80s and mid-90s, the data indicate that actions as
required by GL 89-13 have had positive results. The large increase in failures in the late 1990s
is a result of a large increase of MIC reported at one plant. 54% of the failures since 1997 can
be attributed to MIC at this plant.


Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for PWRs

FAILURE CAUSE NO. OF
ENTRIES
% OF TOTAL
Corrosion 131 44%
Erosion 39 13%
MIC 51 17%
Cavitation 11 3.6%
Pitting 10 3.3%
Vibration 2 0.7%
Weld Defect 3 1.0%
Galvanic 2 0.7%
Normal Wear 45 15%
Abnormal Wear 1 0.3%
Unknown 4 1.3%

Figure 1 PWR NPRDS / EPIX Service Water System Failures

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
7
6
7
8
8
0
8
2
8
4
8
6
8
8
9
0
9
2
9
4
9
6
9
8
0
0
Year
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

F
a
i
l
u
r
e
s

Table 3-2 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary for BWRs

FAILURE CAUSE

NO. OF ENTRIES

% OF TOTAL
Corrosion 42 20%
Erosion 42 20%
Fittings, Threaded Conn., Nipples 22 11%
Pinhole Leaks 14 6.7%
Pitting 7 3.3%
Weld Cracking 8 3.8%
Galvanic Corrosion 3 1.4%
Cavitation 3 1.4%
MIC 3 1.4%
Bolting 3 1.4%
Waterhammer 1 0.5%
Normal Wear 60 28.7%

Figure 2 BWR NPRDS Raw Water System Failures

Observations

1. Fourteen of the 42 corrosion failures occurred in 1991 at one utility. The causes were attributed
to saltwater corrosion of carbon steel piping as a result of removing the rubber lining during
previous maintenance activities. No corrosion or erosion failures have been reported for that
utility since 1991.

2. Twenty of the 39 erosion failures between 1985 and 1992 were at one utility involving seawater
and carbon steel. Many of these failures were attributed to degradation of the interior protective
coating. Remedial action was to apply two coats of ARCOR S-16 epoxy. Prior to 1992,
Belzona coating was applied.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
8
2
8
4
8
6
8
8
9
0
9
2
9
4
9
6
9
8
0
0
Year
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

F
a
i
l
u
r
e
s

3. The normal wear failure data (60 entries) was included to be consistent with the PWR data
recorded. There was not enough information provided to determine the number of these failures
which may be a result of aging mechanisms (e.g., replacement of valves and components with no
other reason than aging and normal wear).

4. Prior to 1985, there was only one NPRDS failure reported by BWR raw water systems (one
erosion failure in 1982). Observation 6 for the PWR data is applicable to the BWR data. The
trend by year for the BWR data, discounting normal wear failures, is shown in Figure 2.

5. As with the PWRs, there does not seem to be a conformity among the plants in reporting service
water system data. For example, three sites were reporting over 46% of the total number of
failures (excluding normal wear failures).

6. Two of the galvanic corrosion failures reported in 1993 and 1995 involved the use of copper
gaskets. The other galvanic failure occurred in 1985 and involved a carbon steel and stainless
steel coupling.

7. Two of the three MIC failures were reported from the same site, one in 1989 and one in 1991.
The material was carbon steel. It is possible that MIC failures are more widespread than
reported in the NPRDS / EPIX, and that some of the causes reported as pitting, pinhole leaks,
and corrosion may be attributable to microorganisms. The difference between pitting and MIC
is difficult to discern without a thorough investigation.

8. The three cavitation failures were associated with valve throttling. The remedial action was to
replace the valve internals with an anti-cavitation trim.

9. The failures were weighted toward sea/brackish water versus fresh or river water by a ratio of
approximately 65 to 35%.


A search was made of generic NRC correspondence that might relate to aging degradation in non-
Class 1 mechanical and structural components. The documents searched were Circulars, Bulletins,
Information Notices, and Generic Letters. Of these, 23 were considered to be related, either directly
or indirectly, to the raw water/carbon steel or stainless steel combinations. Eighteen were
Information Notices, 2 were IE Bulletins, and 3 were Generic Letters. These entries are discussed
briefly below.

Information Notices
IN 79-07: Rupture of Radwaste Tanks
In November 1977 a radwaste tank ruptured at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station. Two problems
led to the tank failure. First, the tank vent, which was intended to relieve excessive pressure in the
radwaste tank, had been plugged by accumulated solidified boric acid concentrates. Second,
corrosion had weakened the capability of the radwaste tank to withstand pressure. Individually, or in
combination, these problems were causative factors in the rupture of the radwaste tank due to
overpressurization. This tank had a history of corrosion problems such that the corrosion probably

caused some weakness which contributed to the rupture. The tank was constructed of type 304
stainless steel. The plant was a seacoast site such that significant amounts of chlorides were present
in the aerated waste system and, consequently, in the waste concentrate tank. The presence of
significant amounts of chlorides, coupled with residual welding stresses in the type 304 stainless
steel, resulted in chloride stress corrosion.

IN 80-37: Containment Cooler Leaks and Reactor Cavity Flooding at Indian Point Unit 2
Indian Point 2 experienced significant, multiple service water leakage from the containment fan
cooling units. These units have a history of such leakage.

IN 81-21: Potential Loss of Direct Access to Ultimate Heat Sink
An event at San Onofre Unit 1 and two events at the Brunswick Station have indicated that
situations not explicitly discussed in Bulletin 81-03 may occur and result in a loss of direct access to
the ultimate heat sink. These situations are: 1) Debris from shell fish other than Asiatic clams and
mussels may cause flow blockage problems essentially identical to those described in the bulletin.
2) Flow blockage in heat exchangers can cause high pressure drops that, in turn, deform baffles,
allowing bypass flow and reducing the pressure drop to near normal values. Once this occurs, heat
exchanger flow blockage may not be detectable by pressure drop measurements. 3) Change in
operating conditions. (A lengthy outage with no flow through seawater systems appears to have
permitted a buildup of mussels in systems where previous periodic inspections over more than a ten
year period showed no appreciable problem.)

IN 83-46: Common-Mode Valve Failures Degrade Surrys Recirculation Spray Subsystem
This notice also warns about common-mode failures of other components or systems using brackish
and/or silty service water. The concerns are plugging resulting from marine growth or silt deposit,
leakage resulting from corrosion or erosion, or a combination.

IN 84-71: Graphitic Corrosion of Cast Iron in Salt Water
Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 reported through-wall corrosion in the salt water side of their CCW system.
They identified the corrosion as graphitic corrosion where an electrolytic cell is established between
the graphite and the iron within the cast iron itself when in contact with water containing enough
dissolved salts to act as an electrolyte. The phenomenon generally occurs on ships or coastal plants,
but the Notice states that it can occur inland if the raw cooling water is sufficiently contaminated.
The attack can be minimized by installation of sacrificial zinc plates. Other ways to reduce the
attack are by choosing alternate materials or the application of a corrosion resistant coating. The
Notice cautions that the coating approach must be carefully implemented because a small break in
the coating concentrates the attack at the location and accelerates the local rate of corrosion. BG&E
replaced the waterboxes and coated with a coaltar-epoxy. They also committed to developing a
long-term program for monitoring the integrity of cast iron components in salt water service.

IN 85-24: Failures of Protective Coatings in Pipes and Heat Exchangers
Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station Unit 1 personnel discovered delamination and peeling of the
interior epoxy lining in three 24-inch 90 degree elbows in the spray pond piping and similar epoxy
failures in the epoxy lined diesel generator heat exchangers. The epoxies were Plasite 7122-H and
Plasite 7155-H. The failures were attributed to improper installation methods and inadequate curing

times. Repairs were successfully made with Plasite 9009-IT and a final report was issued on the
subject.

IN 85-30: Microbiologically Induced Corrosion of Containment Service Water System
H. B. Robinson reported significant corrosion pitting due to MIC in stainless steel piping of their
service water system. Inspection revealed leakage at 54 weld joints. Numerous sleeve assemblies
were required to restore integrity of the welds degraded by the corrosion attack. The Notice
mentions several general methods for inhibiting MIC that have had varied degrees of success.
Methods mentioned included application of protective coatings in conjunction with cathodic
protection, corrosion inhibitors, or water chemical treatment such as periodic shock chlorination.
The Notice also mentions that relatively rapid fluid flow tends to prevent attachment of organisms
whereas low flow rates or stagnant conditions favor biofouling and concentration cell corrosion.
Also, cleaning and dry lay up, or periodic recirculation flushing, during extended outages to mitigate
known biological activity would appear to be prudent alternatives.

IN 85-56: Inadequate Environment Control for Components and Systems in Extended Storage or
Lay-Up
Four cases were cited where instances of improper storage or lay-up have resulted in significant
damage and extended plant outages. Two cases at Nine Mile Point Unit 2 and Hope Creek involved
corrosion damage in heat exchangers due to standing water in the components in storage prior to
operation. The incidents at H. B. Robinson reported in IN 85-30 above were reiterated. The fourth
case was reported by Palo Verde where corrosion had been caused by contaminated water
inadvertently left in the auxiliary feedwater pumps after prestartup flushing of the system.

IN 86-96: Heat Exchanger Fouling Can Cause Inadequate Operability of Service Water Systems
This Notice was to alert recipients to the potential for fouling in heat exchangers in raw water
systems that may impair the heat removal capability assumed in the safety analysis. The Notice also
referenced recommendations of NUREG/CR-4626 which included: (1) a thorough system
evaluation to focus surveillance and control efforts for the best return on plant safety and efficient
operation, (2) revision of plant technical specifications to reflect improved procedures, (3)
monitoring the effectiveness of control procedures as a part of the surveillance program, and (4)
including biofouling surveillance in the routine maintenance program.

IN 88-37: Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components
This Notice was issued to alert recipients to a potentially generic problem involving flow blockage
in safety-related piping interconnections due to biofouling. The Notice describes an event at
Catawba Unit 2 wherein the auxiliary feedwater flow became degraded after suction switchover
from the condensate storage tank to the safety grade nuclear service water system. After
disassembly, the flow control valves were found to be clogged with Asiatic clam shells. After the
incident, Duke Power initiated a program of flushes and inspections of dead legs between the service
water system and various safety-related systems.


IN 89-01: Valve Body Erosion
Inspections by the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit 1, indicated areas of significant but
localized erosion on the internal surfaces of several carbon steel valve bodies. Identical valves in
Unit 2 also indicated similar erosion. A similar problem at Hatch Unit 1 was attributed to cavitation
in a 24-inch globe valve. The root cause for the Brunswick problem was not finalized at the time the
Notice was released, but the licensee believed that the erosion was caused by cavitation by throttling
the globe valve below its design range.

IN 89-76: Biofouling Agent: Zebra Mussel
This Notice was to alert addressees to potential problems related to biofouling of service water and
cooling water systems that may result from a recently identified biofouling agent, Dreissena
Polymorpha (zebra mussel). The zebra mussel is a small mollusk native to the Black, Caspian, and
Azov Seas that was discovered in Lake Erie of the Laurentian Great Lakes of North America in
1988. The mussels can potentially obstruct flow of water through pipes, hoses, screens, and
condensers when their numbers are substantial. Biofouling attributed to this mussel was observed at
several power plants. Areas of immediate concern were along the Great Lakes and major tributaries
and canals.

IN 90-26: Inadequate Flow of Essential Service Water to Room Coolers and Heat Exchangers for
Engineered Safety-Feature Systems
This Notice was to alert addressees to potential problems resulting from using the wrong flow and
pressure drop relationship in establishing adequate flow of essential service water to room coolers
for engineered safety-feature systems and from failing to establish or maintain balanced flows in
essential service water systems. The notice pointed out that the relationship between flow and
pressure drop for room coolers could vary even for the same vendor component because of design
differences (with or without cleanout plugs). Measurements using flow instrumentation confirmed
this.

IN 90-39: Recent Problems with Service Water Systems
This Notice cites eight instances of problems in service water systems which could cause failure of
an adequate supply of cooling water to safety-related components. On March 9, 1990, Clinton
reported flow distribution problems in the essential service water system. On March 14, 1990,
Surry reported closed dampers which caused the diesel engine to fail to start. On March 21, 1990,
Peach Bottom reported that emergency service water flow was inadequate due to silt and corrosion
product accumulations. On March 23, 1990, River Bend reported MIC problems in the service
water system. Acidic well water was used for the initial fill causing corrosion. The chemistry was
corrected and the acidic attack stopped, but not the MIC. They plan to chemically clean or replace
the piping as necessary. On March 26, 1990, Haddam Neck found that the service water flow to one
of the emergency diesel generators was below that assumed in the safety analysis. On March 27,
1990, Farley reported inadequate service water flows to some safety loads without operator action.
On April 3, 1990, Perry had to declare a service water pump and diesel generator inoperable due to a
failed gasket. On April 11, 1990, Fitzpatrick reported that silt had been found in check valves in
emergency service water lines to the seal coolers for two pumps in the RHR system.

IN 94-03: Deficiencies Identified During Service Water System Operational Performance
Inspections
This Notice was to alert addressees to deficiencies identified by the NRC during service water
system operational performance inspections that were performed. Deficiencies identified included
inadequate evaluation of heat transfer requirements, inadequate testing programs and procedures,
and weaknesses in the implementation of Generic Letter 89-13. Of particular note was the failure to
include certain safety components and lines into the IST, inspection, or maintenance programs. This
Notice does not specifically address aging mechanisms or effects; however, since these programs are
sometimes credited with managing effects, the findings illustrate the importance of systematic
engineering analyses, testing, inspection, and maintenance of service water systems.

IN 94-59: Accelerated Dealloying of Cast Aluminum-Bronze Valves Caused by Microbiologically
Induced Corrosion
On October 12, 1993, Surry operators noted varying degrees of corrosion in 22 J amesbury cast
aluminum-bronze ball valves in 2-inch and less service water lines. This Notice is not directly
applicable since the material is not carbon steel, however, it shows the presence of sulfate-reducing
and acid-producing bacteria in service water systems. This Notice reports flows of 2 to 3 fps in the
subject system and states flows less than approximately 5 fps lends to the system the potential for
fouling which can promote MIC. Surry planned to replace the valves with valves more resistant to
the conditions in the service water system.

IN 94-79: Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion of Emergency Diesel Generator Service Water
Piping
On February 12, 1994, a through-wall leak developed in the service water system supply piping to
the emergency diesel generator. The licensee determined that the leak was caused by poor initial
weld quality and MIC. On May 6, 1994, Beaver Valley found a through-wall leak on the river water
system header to the emergency diesel generators. The leak was in the below grade portion of a 6-
inch A106 Grade B carbon steel piping. The cause of the pitting and leak was determined to be
MIC. Cultures contained sulfur-reducing bacteria and the anaerobic bacteria Clostridium. The
Notice states that stagnant or intermittent-flow conditions, as in the case of emergency diesel service
water supply headers, are conducive to the growth of microorganisms that can accelerate corrosion
rates. It is noted that stainless steels are not immune to MIC and that MIC could damage metals
lined with polymeric materials, typically at coating imperfections. Alternatives discussed were
replacement materials, mechanical or chemical cleaning, water treatment, and continuous flow
conditions. It was also noted that an existing program at Haddam Neck of hypochlorite injection
was not successful in mitigating MIC problems in stagnant dead-end lines at such locations as the
emergency diesel generator supply.

IN 04-001: Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Recirculation Line Orifice Fouling Potential Common
Cause Failure
This information notice alerted licensees of the potential common cause failure of auxiliary
feedwater pumps because of fouling of pump recirculation line flow orifices. The recirculation flow
restricting orifice (RO) used a multi-stage, anti-cavitation trim package installed in the body of a
globe valve to limit flow. This style of orifice or flow restrictor was installed in the AFW
recirculation lines to eliminate cavitation caused by the old orifices. This type of flow restrictor
used very small channels and holes in each stage combined with a tortuous path to limit flow and

prevent cavitation. A specially fabricated orifice was tested at a contractor laboratory in an effort to
determine a plugging probability with service water. Definitive testing occurred when a debris
mixture of sand, silt, and zebra mussel shells, representative of what would exist in the Service
Water (SW) system, was injected into a closed loop configuration of piping, an orifice, and a
centrifugal pump. The orifice plugged in much less than one minute after the mixture was injected
into the loop. These results were contrary to those of a previously performed computational particle
fouling model analysis that indicated that plugging was unlikely because of the particle size
distribution of debris in SW and the shear forces in the holes and channels of the orifices developed
with the minimum flow required through the orifice for pump cooling.

The significance of these Information Notices is summarized by the following points:

1. The raw water in service water systems provides an aggressively corrosive environment which
is deleterious to most materials of construction.

2. Care should be taken in the application and curing of any protective coatings for corrosion
protection to ensure effectiveness. Complete coverage is also required.

3. MIC is a recurring problem in many service water systems.

4. Improper lay-up during extended outages and stagnant or low flow conditions during pre-
operational startup testing can cause significant corrosion problems for service water systems.

5. Valve body erosion is usually caused by cavitation as a result of operating or throttling outside
the design basis for that valve.

6. Macrofouling has occurred in stagnant portions of piping and periodic flushing/inspection may
be required to control the problem.

7. It is important to properly implement the requirements of Generic Letter 89-13.

The information in the Notices did not contradict any of the reasoning or logic used to develop the
raw water tools.

IE Bulletins
BL 76-01: BWR Isolation Condenser Tube Failure
Condenser tube had a one-inch hole at the U bend. Eddy current testing showed that 30% of the
remaining tubes had extensive cracking to a depth greater than allowed for minimum wall thickness.

BL 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (asiatic
clam) and Mytilus sp. (mussel)
In September of 1980, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2, was shut down after discovering that tech spec
requirements for minimum service water flow rate through the containment cooling units were not
met. The inadequate flow was due to plugging by Asiatic clams. Clams were found in other
equipment cooled by service water in both Units 1 and 2. Proper flow rates were restored only after
the clam debris had been removed manually from the containment cooling units. The Bulletin

discusses the original finding of Asiatic clams in 1938 and their spread across the United States and
Tennessee Valley Authority experience. The Bulletin also discusses methods of control and their
effectiveness including chlorination, heat, and mechanical cleaning. The Bulletin required the
following actions to be taken by the Licensees:

1. Determine whether Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. is present in the vicinity of the station in either
the source or receiving water body.

2. If it is unknown or confirmed that either species is present, determine whether fire protection or
safety-related systems using the water are fouled by clams.

3. If clams, mussels, or shells were found or their presence was not confirmed, measure flow rates
through individual components in potentially affected systems to confirm adequate flow rates.

4. Describe methods either in use or planned for preventing and detecting future flow blockage or
degradation due to clams or mussels or shell debris.

5. Describe the actions taken in items 1 through 3 and include the following information:
a. Applicable portions of the environmental monitoring program.
b. Components and systems affected.
c. Extent of fouling if any existed.
d. How and when fouling was discovered.
e. Corrective and preventive actions.

Generic Letters
GL 89-13: Service Water System Problems Affecting Safety-Related Equipment
This Generic Letter was issued by the NRC, based on operating experience and studies, to require
licensees to supply information regarding service water systems to assure the NRC that the systems
safety functions and compliance with the General Design Criteria will be met.

Specific actions required under GL 89-13 include:

1. Implement and maintain an ongoing program of surveillance and control techniques to
significantly reduce the incidence of flow blockage problems as a result of biofouling for open-
cycle service water systems.

2. Conduct a test program to verify heat transfer capability of all safety-related heat exchangers
controlled by the service water systems.

3. Establish a routine inspection and maintenance program to ensure that corrosion, erosion,
protective coating failure, silting, and biofouling cannot degrade the safety-related functions.

4. Confirm that the service water system will perform its intended safety functions.


5. Confirm that maintenance practices, operating and emergency procedures, and training that
involves the service water system are adequate to ensure performance of safety functions and
that operators will perform effectively.

GL 90-05: Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repair of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3
Piping
This Generic Letter is included because most safety-related service water systems are ASME Class 3
or equivalent and GL-90-05 provides the guidance that will be considered by the NRC staff in
evaluating relief requests submitted by licensees for temporary non-code repairs. The guidance
applies when flaws are discovered during power operation and relief is requested for a temporary
repair until the next scheduled outage exceeding 30 days.

GL 91-13: Essential Service Water System Failures at Multi-Unit Sites
Follow-up to GL 89-13. Redundant and infrequently used cooling loops should be flushed and flow
tested periodically at the maximum design flow to ensure that they are not fouled or plugged.


4. FLOW DIAGRAM/SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT

The following assumptions, overview, respective tool descriptions, and considerations for
comparison to the corresponding information in Volume 2 of NUREG-1801, Revision 1, Generic
Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report Tabulation of Results, apply to these logic tools.

4.1 Assumptions

1. Oxygen level is a significant parameter in many aging mechanisms. It is assumed that the
oxygen level of all raw water is at or above the threshold for corrosive effects.

2. Halides, sulfates, and other aggressive contaminants, singly or in combination with oxygen and
particulates, significantly influence the nature, rate, and severity of corrosion effects. The
assumption is made that these impurities exist in all raw water at levels which will promote
corrosive effects.

3. Crevice corrosion requires some type of crevice (an opening usually a few thousandths of an
inch or less in width) to occur. It is unreasonable to expect an evaluator to respond to a
question of whether or not a crevice exists within a system or component. The logic, therefore,
will assume conservatively that the potential exists for crevices in all components and systems.

4. Pitting requires stagnant or slow moving fluid such that contaminants can concentrate on the
metal surface. For the purposes of this tool logic, low flow for fresh water is defined as <3
ft/sec based on industry experience that shows velocities of 2-3 ft/sec keep the impurities from
precipitating to the component surfaces and minimizes silting, biofouling, and MIC [4]. Low
flow for sea water is defined as <5 ft/sec [3, 16].

which would be difficult to predict without detailed knowledge of all fabrication, maintenance,
and operating history. The level of stresses necessary to cause these aging effects are also
dependent on material type, temperature, and fluid environment. It would be unreasonable to
determine for each application whether or not sufficient stresses exist to allow a particular aging
mechanism to occur. This tool logic conservatively assumes that stresses sufficient to cause
these aging effects are present. As described in Section 3.2.2, IGA is distinguished from SCC in
that stress is not required for it to proceed. With the assumption of sufficient stress, the logic
paths for IGA initiation are encompassed by the SCC logic. Additionally, the aging effects of
IGA and SCC are similar. Therefore, this tool logic does not differentiate between IGA and
SCC.

6. Microorganisms of various types that influence corrosion either directly or indirectly are
assumed to exist to some degree in all raw waters.

7. Not used.


8. Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) of stainless steels is not a significant aging mechanism below
140F. Nickel-based alloys are not susceptible to SCC in the typical operating temperature
range of raw water systems (since temperatures > 500F do not exist in raw water systems).

9. Galvanic corrosion can only progress if the dissimilar metals are in contact in the presence of an
electrolyte. All materials addressed in these tools are in the presence of an electrolyte (raw
water).

10. Although coatings or liners are used in raw water service to prevent contact of the natural/sea
waters with the base metal and actions are typically taken to control biological activity in the
raw water environments, the ensuing logic diagrams do not assume that the corresponding plant
programs are in place, since the programs are not credited in the determination of potential aging
effects. Aging effects that would not be a concern based on the use of a coating, liner, biocide or
other treatment are considered applicable aging effects that require management.

4.2 Overview

for systems and components which are required to undergo an aging management review in
compliance with the license renewal rule. Utilization of these tools at the various sites will result in
the identification of applicable aging effects for plant equipment, based on material and environment
combination. These applicable aging effects must be evaluated and managed or justified not to
require management during the period of extended operation. Demonstration of the adequacy of
aging management programs to manage these effects is outside the scope of this tool and will be
addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described in Section 4.0 of the main document.

These tools identify potential aging effects and also direct the user to areas in the system where
these effects might be preferentially manifested. The age degradation discussions in the previous
sections identify numerous aging mechanisms and their associated aging effects which can occur
in the raw water system equipment addressed by these tools. Figure 3 is the logic diagram to be
used in raw water systems for stainless steel, nickel-base alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys.

Figure 4 is the logic diagram to be used to find locations susceptible to aging in raw water systems
for carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and cast iron. Figure 5 is the logic diagram to be used for copper
and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys in a raw water environment. These figures,
or alternatively Table 4-1, Table 4-2, and Table 4-3, respectively, guide the user through logic to
determine, based on specific system or component materials, environment and/or operating
conditions, whether these effects are applicable. The tools described in the following sections
address the effects of aging on stainless steel, nickel-base alloy, titanium and titanium alloy,
carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and copper alloy, and aluminum and aluminum alloy
equipment in raw water service. These tools are organized such that the individuals utilizing the
tool do not require detailed knowledge of aging mechanisms or their effects. The logics do,
however, require that the user be familiar with the materials of construction, various applicable
environments, and all system operating conditions.

The evaluation logic groups various aging effects such as loss of material, cracking, etc., to quickly
and efficiently disposition equipment. Utilization of the tool, in effect, documents the dispositioning
of aging mechanisms and the resultant aging effects, and provides a link to the program evaluations
and Aging Management Review (AMR) phase. The results not only identify the effects which must
be managed but, given the screening (mechanism applicability) criteria, can be a valuable input
when determining how and where aging management programs are used.


Table 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3 (added in Revision 3) identify applicable aging effects, and corresponding
mechanisms, that may require programmatic oversight for the period of extended operation, as well
as the applicability criteria for the occurrence and propagation of the mechanisms. These tables
summarize the information depicted on the corresponding logic diagrams (Figure 3Figure 5) and
are organized to first address aging effects common to the materials covered by the table and then
those that are specific to a material. The potential aging effects, together with the detailed
mechanism discussions in Section 3.0 and assumptions in Section 4.1 of this appendix, provide the
basis for the development of the raw water tool described below.

4.3.1 Stainless Steel, Titanium and Titanium Alloys, and Nickel-Base Alloys

Figure 3 contains the logic and criteria to evaluate aging effects for the stainless steel, titanium and
titanium alloy, and nickel-base alloy components within raw water systems. The upper branch
addresses the cracking and loss of material effects due to stress corrosion cracking/intergranular
attack, crevice/pitting corrosion, and erosion. In addition to the assumptions in Section 4.1, the
existence of sensitized stainless steel is assumed in the stainless steel logic. While pitting corrosion is
not a concern for titanium or its alloys, crevice corrosion, SCC, and hydrogen embrittlement of
titanium and titanium alloys are addressed in the upper branch of Figure 3. This upper branch also
discriminates between stagnant and low flow conditions, as pitting corrosion for stainless steel and
nickel-base alloys is only a concern in these environments. SCC/IGA of stainless steels is a concern at
temperatures greater than 140F. Erosion of stainless steel due to particulate matter can occur
depending on the nature and amount of suspended particulate matter in the flowing fluid and the fluid
velocity. The next branch addresses the potential for microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) in a
raw water environment. The last branch addresses the potential for material loss due to
macroorganisms and/or silting. These contaminants typically exist only on equipment directly
connected to raw water sources such as rivers, oceans, etc. This aging effect is only a concern where
the potential for such contamination exists.

4.3.2 Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron

Figure 4 contains the logic and criteria to evaluate aging effects for the carbon steel, low-alloy steel,
and cast iron components within raw water systems.

The upper branch addresses the loss of material due to selective leaching (also called graphitization)
of gray cast iron. Coatings or liners with adequate integrity verification are effective in preventing
this mechanism; however, it is incumbent on the user of these tools to demonstrate that the programs

in place to verify and maintain the integrity of these coatings or liners are effective as described in
Section 4.0 of the main document.

The next branches of Figure 4 address the loss of material effects due to general corrosion, crevice
corrosion, and pitting corrosion. Since the assumption has been made that high oxygen and high
impurities exist, the operative condition to promote pitting corrosion is low or stagnant flow. The
flow rate does not significantly impact the susceptibility to general corrosion or crevice corrosion.
(Under low flow conditions a protective surface film limits general corrosion. Low flow can exist in
crevices even under high bulk fluid flows, with subsequent crevice corrosion possible under these
conditions.)

The fifth branch assumes microorganisms are present in raw water systems and, if the pH is less
than 10.5, then material loss due to MIC is a concern. The sixth branch asks whether there is the
potential for macrofouling/silting. The seventh branch checks for locations or geometries with high
velocities which may increase the potential for erosion.

The last branch checks for the potential for galvanic corrosion where dissimilar materials are in
contact. A metal is susceptible to galvanic corrosion when electrolytically connected to a material
higher in the galvanic series. The potential for galvanic corrosion is higher in service water systems
because of the high incidence of material change-outs and interfaces with other systems or
components which are stainless steel or other more noble (cathodic) metals.

4.3.3 Copper and Copper Alloys and Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys

Figure 5 contains the logic and criteria to evaluate aging effects for the copper and copper alloy and
aluminum and aluminum alloy components within raw water systems.

The upper branch checks for the possibility of galvanic corrosion at any location where there is
electrolytic contact between dissimilar materials. The electrolytic nature of raw water is a given.
The potential for galvanic corrosion is higher in service water systems because of the high incidence
of material replacement and interfaces with other systems or components which are stainless steels.
The second branch addresses the loss of material of brasses and bronzes with > 15% zinc content
and aluminum bronze with > 8% aluminum due to selective leaching. The addition of an inhibiting
element during manufacture of a susceptible alloy prevents selective leaching. (Naval brass, for
example, is produced by the addition of an inhibiting element to Muntz metal.)

The third branch addresses the loss of material due to pitting corrosion and crevice corrosion in raw
water systems. Stagnant or low flowing conditions are a prerequisite for pitting corrosion, which
only affects the identified copper and aluminum alloys (within the scope of alloys covered by this
tool). The fourth branch addresses stress corrosion cracking of aluminum bronze and some
brass/bronze alloys with > 15% zinc content. The presence of ammonia or ammonium is a
necessary ingredient to stress corrosion cracking of these alloys. The branch also addresses the
stress corrosion cracking of other aluminum alloys. The fifth branch checks for locations or
geometries with high velocities which may increase the potential for erosion.


The sixth branch assumes microorganisms are present in raw water systems and, if the pH is less
than 10.5, then material loss due to MIC is a concern. The last branch addresses the potential for
loss of material as a result of macroorganisms (macrofouling) and/or silting.

4.4 GALL Comparison

environment(s), aging effects (and associated mechanisms) typically requiring management for
license renewal applicants, and the suggested aging management program (AMP) for various
mechanical components. GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for raw water
environments addressed by this tool. GALL Chapter IV (Reactor Vessel, Internals, and Reactor
Coolant System) is focused on Class 1 components that are not addressed by this tool and does not
include raw water environments. The identification and evaluation of aging management programs
(AMPs) is outside the scope of this tool and will be addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described
in Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Tables 4-1, 4-2, and
4-3 as applicable, with the following material, environment, aging effect, and aging mechanism
considerations.

The materials for the pertinent items in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the
materials addressed by this tool, which are described in Section 2.1. Carbon or low-alloy steel is
referred to as steel or steel (with or without lining/coating or with degraded lining/coating) in
the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool. Cast iron is referred to as gray cast iron
specifically or is otherwise included with steel in the GALL, including the items for environments
addressed by this tool. Nickel-base alloys are referred to as nickel alloy, copper and copper alloys
are referred to as copper alloy or copper alloy > 15% Zn, and aluminum and aluminum alloys
are referred to as aluminum in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool. The non-
metals that are listed in the GALL for environments addressed by this tool include glass and
elastomers. Plastics, galvanized steel, and titanium and titanium alloys are not listed in the GALL
for the raw water environments addressed by this tool.

The GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII environment of raw water is bounded by the environments
addressed in this tool, which are described in Section 2.2, as clarified. Chapter IX of the GALL
includes untreated water (including originally treated water that is no longer controlled by the
Chemistry Program) in floor drains and sumps in its definition of raw water. However, only item
VIII.G-36 (steel exposed to raw water with a plant-specific aging management program) and the
items for selective leaching would possibly include drainage/waste water, as the other GALL items
cite the open-cycle cooling water program or fire protection program, and these programs are not
applicable to drain/sump water.

The GALL items addressing glass in raw water (V.F-8, VII.J-11, and VIII.I-7)
concur with the conclusions of Section 3.6 with respect to there being no applicable aging effects.
The GALL addresses elastomer seals and components in raw water in Chapter VII. One item
(VII.C1-1) indicates that they are subject to hardening and loss of strength due to elastomer
degradation. Chapter 7 of EPRI report 1002950 [37], referenced in Section 3.6 of this tool,

addresses the age-related degradation of typical elastomers in nuclear plant service, including
change in material properties (e.g., hardening and loss of strength) and cracking. The GALL
indicates for item(s) in Chapter VII (VII.C1-19, VII.C3-10, VII.H2-22) that steel is evaluated with
or without linings/coatings or with degraded linings/coatings, which is consistent with the logic and
assumptions of this tool, and also identifies lining or coating degradation as a mechanism for loss of
material. GALL item VII.C1-2 lists loss of material due to erosion as an aging effect requiring
management for elastomer seals and components, which concurs with the discussion in
Section 3.1.6 of this tool, which indicates that linings or coatings are susceptible to damage under
conditions of high fluid velocity or flow discontinuities.

The GALL does not evaluate mechanisms separately, as is done in Section 3.0 of this tool.
Additionally, the aging mechanisms identified in GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII are grouped
without clear indication as to mechanisms (e.g., MIC and/or fouling) that are indicated as applicable
to certain components but not to others. The aging effect cited in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII
for metals in the raw water environments includes loss of material, with the following groupings of
mechanisms depending on material susceptibility:

General, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and fouling
General, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, fouling, and
lining/coating degradation
Pitting and crevice corrosion
Pitting and crevice corrosion, and fouling
Pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion
Pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and fouling
Selective leaching

Per Chapter IX of GALL, fouling can also be categorized as particulate fouling (sediment, silt, dust,
and corrosion products), marine biofouling, or macrofouling. This categorization is consistent with
the discussions in Section 3.1.8 of this tool, with respect to macrofouling (biofouling) and silting as
applicable mechanisms for a loss of material in raw water environments.

The GALL does not address cracking, due to SCC/IGA, or reduction of fracture toughness, due to
hydrogen embrittlement of titanium and titanium alloys, in raw water environments, whereas they
are evaluated in this tool, in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.3.1, respectively. Additionally, the GALL does not
identify galvanic corrosion or erosion (of metals) as mechanisms for loss of material in raw water
environments. Galvanic corrosion, evaluated in Section 3.1.3, and erosion, evaluated in
Section 3.1.6, are applicable mechanisms in this tool.

The GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII items that address aging effects for external surfaces, closure
bolting, and heat exchangers are addressed separately in Appendix E, Appendix F, and Appendix G,
respectively. Likewise, GALL items for fatigue are evaluated separately in Appendix H and are not
addressed in this tool.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. pH <10.5

V.C-3,
V.D1-25

VII.H2-18

VIII.E-27,
VIII.F-22,
VIII.G-30
Yes Sections 2.1, 3.1.7, 4.3.1
Assumption 4.1.6

GALL items are only for stainless steel and also
include pitting and crevice corrosion.
Additionally, GALL item V.C-3 includes
fouling of containment isolation
piping/components.

GALL does not include any items for titanium or
titanium alloys.
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys and
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
Loss of Material /
Macrofouling
1. Potential for macrofouling (mussels,
clams, etc.) and/or silting
and
2. Stagnant, low flow locations (<3fps
freshwater and <5fps sea/brackish
water)
V.C-3

VII.C1-15,
VII.G-19
Yes Sections 2.1, 3.1.8, 4.3.1

GALL items are only for stainless steel, and
GALL Chapter V items (containment isolation
piping/components) also include pitting and
crevice and MIC. GALL Chapter VII items also
include pitting and crevice, but not MIC.

None of the GALL items address flow velocities
or the potential for macrofouling.
Also, GALL does not include any items for
titanium or titanium alloys.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. Always

Sections 2.1, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Low flow (< 3 fps)
V.C-3,
V.D1-15,
V.D1-25

VII.C1-15,
VII.C3-6,
VII.C3-7,
VII.G-19

VII.H2-18
VIII.E-27,
VIII.F-22,
VIII.G-30
Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.4.

Specified GALL items are for stainless steel and
nickel alloy (VII.C3-6) exposed to raw water and
list both pitting and crevice corrosion, without
description of applicability criteria.

Item V.C-3 also lists MIC and fouling of
stainless steel. Items VII.C1-15 and VII.G-19
also list fouling, but not MIC, as mechanisms for
loss of material of stainless steel. Items VII.H2-
18, VIII.E-27, VIII.F-22, and VIII.G-30 all list
MIC in addition to crevice and pitting as
mechanism for stainless steel loss of material, but
do not list fouling.

This implies that mechanisms are dependent on
conditions in a system, but clear indication of
what those conditions are is not included in the
GALL items.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys and
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Erosion
1. Component subject to high velocities,
constricted flow, or fluid change of
direction

Note: Though conservatively susceptible to
erosion, stainless steel is used as an overlay
for its resistance to erosion. Nickel-base
alloys, titanium and titanium alloys are
considered to have similar characteristics
with respect to erosion resistance.
None No Sections 2.1, 3.1.6, 4.3.1
Assumption 4.1.2

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not include
erosion as an aging mechanism requiring
management for metals in raw water.
Wrought
Austenitic
Stainless Steel
and CASS
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1. Temperature > 140F

Note: Sensitized stainless steel has been
known to experience SCC at ambient
temperatures (Section 3.2.2).
None No Sections 2.1, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.5, 4.1.8

SCC or IGA as an aging mechanism for stainless
steel in raw water.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
and
2. Saltwater or brackish water with pH <
10
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3

Titanium and titanium alloys are not addressed
in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII.
Cracking / SCC 1. Not ASTM grade 1, 2, 7, 11, or 12
and
2. Salt or brackish water
and
3a. Alloy contains > 5% Aluminum (Al)
or
3b. Alloy contains > 0.20% Oxygen (O)
or
3c. Alloy contains any amount of Tin (Sn).
None No Sections 2.1, 3.2.2.

Titanium and titanium alloys are not addressed
Titanium and
Titanium Alloys
Reduction in
Fracture
Toughness /
Hydrogen
Embrittlement
and
2. pH < 3 or pH > 12
and
3. Atomic hydrogen present (galvanic
couple, impressed cathodic current)

Titanium and Titanium alloys are not addressed


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
General
Corrosion
1. Always Sections 2.1, 3.1.1
Assumption 4.1.1, 4.1.2
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
1. Always Sections 2.1, 3.1.4, 3.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3

Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Low flow (<3 fps)
V.C-5

VII.C1-19,
VII.C3-10,
VII.H2-22,
VII.G-24

VIII.G-36
Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.4

GALL items cite general, pitting, crevice, and
MIC, and fouling as mechanisms for loss of
material of steel in raw water. As used in GALL,
steel includes both carbon steel, low-alloy steel,
and cast iron.

GALL items VII.C1-19, VII.C3-10, and VII.H2-
22 address degradation of steel with
coating/linings or with degraded coatings/linings.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion

galvanic corrosion as an aging mechanism for loss
of material in raw water.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Erosion
1. Subject to high velocity, constricted
flow, or fluid direction change

Note: Elastomer linings or coatings subject
to the same conditions are also subject to
erosion (Section 3.1.6).
VII.C1-2 No Sections 2.1, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.2

erosion as an aging mechanism for loss of material
of metals in raw water. Item VII.C1-2 cites
erosion as an aging mechanism for loss of
elastomer (e.g., linings/coatings) material.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. pH <10.5 Sections 2.1, 3.1.7
Assumptions 4.1.6

See above discussion for pitting corrosion.
Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron (Contd)
Loss of Material /
Macrofouling
clams, etc.) and/or silting
and
2. Stagnant, low flow locations (<3fps
freshwater and <5fps sea/brackish
water)
V.C-5

VII.C1-19,
VII.C3-10,
VII.G-34,
VII.H2-22

VIII.G-36
Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.8

Specified GALL items do not include applicability
criteria for fouling (e.g., stagnant/low flow).
Cast Iron Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
1. Material is gray cast iron VII.C1-11,
VII.C3-4,
VII.G-14,
VII.H2-14

VIII.A-7,
VIII.G-24
Yes Sections 2.1, 3.1.2

Specified GALL items identify selective leaching
as an aging mechanism for gray cast iron in raw
water.

Table 4-3 Aging Effects Summary Copper and Copper Alloys, Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
VII.C1-9,
VII.C3-2,
VII.G-12,
VII.H2-11

VIII.A-4,
VIII.E-18,
VIII.F-14,
VIII.G-20

Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.4

GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII items include
only copper alloy or do not distinguish between
copper (commercially pure) and copper alloys.

GALL item VII.C1-9 lists crevice and pitting
corrosion. GALL items VII.C3-2, VII.G-12 also
cite MIC and fouling as mechanisms for loss of
material for copper alloys. GALL items VII.H2-
11, VIII.E-18, VIII.F-14, and VIII.G-20 also cite
MIC as a mechanism for loss of material, but do
not list fouling (macrofouling in this tool).

GALL items do not provide mechanism
applicability criteria and the listing of
mechanisms (e.g., fouling and MIC) for certain
copper alloy items but not for others implies that
the occurrence has something to do with the
particular system.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion

Note: Copper and copper alloys are cathodic
to carbon steel, low-alloy steel and cast iron;
and anodic to stainless steel, nickel-base
alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys.

galvanic corrosion as an aging mechanism in
raw water.
Loss of Material /
Erosion
Assumption 4.1.2

erosion as an aging mechanism in raw water.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. pH <10.5 Sections 2.1, 3.1.7

Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Macrofouling
clams, etc.) or silting
and
2. Material is Copper alloy with <80% Cu
or >8% Al
and
3. Stagnant or low flow (<3fps in
freshwater and <5 fps in sea or brackish
water
VII.C3-2,
VII.G-12,
VII.H2-11

VIII.A-4,
VIII.E-18,
VIII.F-14,
VIII.G-20
Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.4, 3.1.8

GALL items VII.C1-9 and VII.G-12 do not
include applicability criteria for fouling (e.g.,
stagnant/low flow). Other specified items do not
list fouling.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1. Fluid contains ammonia or ammonium
salts
and
or material is Aluminum Bronze with >
8% Al.

Note: Ammonia (NH
3
) or ammonium salt
may be present in the fluid such as for pH
control, in a cleaning solvent, from organic
decay, or as a result of MIC.

SCC/IGA as an aging mechanism for copper
alloys in raw water.

SCC/IGA in the identified copper alloys is only
a potential for sites whose operating experience
shows amounts of ammonia or an ammonium
salt in raw water.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
General
Corrosion
1. Fluid contains ammonia or ammonium
salts
and
or material is Aluminum Bronze with >
8% Al.

Note: Ammonia (NH
3
) or ammonium salt
may be present in the fluid such as for pH
control, in a cleaning solvent, from organic
decay, or as a result of MIC.
None No Section 2.1, 3.1.1, and 3.2.2

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not address
general corrosion of copper and copper alloys.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of material /
Selective
leaching
1. Material is not an inhibited copper
alloy
and
or Aluminum Bronze with >8% Al

Note: Small amounts of alloying elements
such as tin, phosphorous, arsenic and
antimony inhibit dezincification, but may
reduce resistance to SCC, in copper alloys.
VII.C1-10,
VII.C3-3,
VII.G-13,
VII.H2-13

VIII.A-6,
VIII.E-20,
VIII.F-17,
VIII.G-22
Assumption 4.1.1

Specified GALL items list selective leaching of
Copper alloy >15% Zn in raw water. Items
do not consider the aluminum content or whether
the alloy is inhibited.
Loss of Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3
Loss of Material /
Pitting
Corrosion
VII.G-8 Yes
Sections 2.1, 3.1.5
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.4

Specified GALL item cites crevice and pitting
corrosion of aluminum (does not distinguish
between commercially pure aluminum and
aluminum alloys).
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion

Note: Aluminum and aluminum alloys are
anodic to all metals addressed by this tool.

galvanic corrosion as an aging mechanism in
raw water.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Erosion
Assumption 4.1.2

erosion as an aging mechanism in raw water.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. pH <10.5 None No Sections 2.1, 3.1.7

MIC as an aging mechanism for loss of
aluminum material in raw water.
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys (Contd)
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1. Material is aluminum alloy with >12%
Zn or 6% Mg and/or >1% Cu

SCC/IGA as an aging mechanism for cracking of
aluminum in raw water.

Figure 3 Raw Water / Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloys, and Titanium and
Titanium Alloys Tool
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Is material
titanium or
titanium alloy?
Hydrogen
embrittlement
is a concern.
Cracking due to
SCC is not a
concern.
Raw Water /
Stainless steel,
titanium /
titanium alloys,
nickel-based
alloys?
MIC is a concern.
Is temperature
>160F?
Salt or brackish
water with pH <10?
Is temperature
>175F?
Is pH<3 or
pH >12?
Atomic hydrogen
present (galvanic
couple, impressed
cathodic current)?
Hydrogen
embrittlement is
not a concern.
Crevice corrosion and
hydrogen
embrittlement are not
a concern.
Material is not ASTM
grade 1, 2, 7, 11, 12?
Salt or brackish
water?
Alloy contains >5% Zn or
>0.20% O
2
or any Sn?
a concern.
Is there stagnant or
low flow (<3 fps)?
Loss of material due to pitting corrosion is
not a concern.
Material is a
stainless steel?
Is temperature
>140F?
not a concern.
Is PH <10.5?
not a concern.
Does the potential for
macrofouling organisms
(mussels, clams, algae,
etc.) and/or silting exist?
Loss of material due to macrofouling
(and/or silting) is a concern.
Loss of material due to macrofouling (and/or silting) is not
a concern.
Is component subject to high
velocities, constricted flow, or
erosion is a concern.
not a concern.
Is there stagnant or low
flow (<3 fps in freshwater
and <5 fps in sea or
brackish water)?
Y
N

Figure 4 Raw Water / Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron Tool
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Is material
Gray cast
iron?
Raw Water /
Carbon steel,
low-alloy
steel, cast
iron?
MIC is a concern.
selective leaching is a concern.
Loss of material due to selective leaching is
not a concern.
low flow (<3 fps)?
Loss of material due to pitting corrosion is
not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice corrosion
is a concern.
Is PH <10.5?
not a concern.
(and/or silting) is a concern.
Loss of material due to macrofouling (and/or silting) is
not a concern.
velocities, constricted flow, or
erosion may be a concern.
not a concern.
Loss of material due to general corrosion
is a concern.
Y
N
Is material in contact with a
more cathodic (noble) metal
in the galvanic series?
Loss of material due to galvanic
galvanic corrosion is
not a concern.
brackish water)?
Y
N

Figure 5 Raw Water / Copper and Copper Alloys, and Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys Tool

Y
Y Y
N
N
N
N N
N
N
N
N
Y
Is material in contact with a
more cathodic (noble)
leaching is a concern.
not a concern.
Raw Water /
Copper and
copper alloys,
aluminum and
aluminum
alloys?
MIC is a concern.
to galvanic corrosion
is a concern.
Material is not an
inhibited copper alloy?
Is the material:
N
Y
velocities, constricted flow or
Loss of material due to erosion
is a concern.
Y
low flow (<3 fps)?
Y
Is ammonia or an
ammonium salt
present in the fluid?
Is material Brass/Bronze
>15% Zn or Aluminum
Bronze > 8% Al
Cracking due to SCC
is not a concern.
Cracking due to
SCC is a concern.
Y
Y
N
Is PH <10.5?
MIC is not a concern.
Y
macrofouling and/or silting
is a concern.
and/or silting is not a concern.
Material is a copper
alloy with <80%
copper or > 8% Al?
Y
Is material Aluminum alloy
with >12% Zn or >6% Mg
and/or >1% Cu?
Cracking due to
SCC is a concern.
Y
brackish water)?
Y
N

5. REFERENCES


2. J . F. Copeland, et al., Component Life Estimation: LWR Structural Materials Degradation
Mechanisms, EPRI NP-5461, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA,
September 1987.

3. M. H. Uhlig, Corrosion Handbook, J ohn Wiley and Sons, 1948.


5. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986.

6. D. J . DePaul, Ed., Corrosion and Wear Handbook for Water Cooled Reactors, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1957.

7. G. Cragnolino, A Review of Erosion-Corrosion of Steels in High Temperature Water,
Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials
in Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, ILL, 1987, p 397.

8. V. N. Shah and P. E. MacDonald, Eds., Aging and Life Extension of Major Light Water Reactor
Components, Elsevier, New York, 1993.

9. B. Craig, Environmentally Induced Cracking, from Metals Handbook, Vol. 13, Corrosion,
9th Edition, American Society for Metals International, Materials Park, OH, 1987.

10. Standard Format and Content of Technical Information for Application to Renew Nuclear
Power Plant Operating Licenses, Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1009, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington D.C., December 1990.

11. B. E. Crane, G. O. Hayner, and D. H. Pope, Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in
Condenser Water Boxes at Crystal River-3, Proceedings of the Third International Symposium
on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear
Society, La Grange Park, IL, 1987, p. 647.

12. Service Water System Corrosion and Deposition Sourcebook, EPRI TR-103403,
December 1993.

13. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, American Society of Metals,
Copyright 1987.

14. Properties and Selection: Stainless Steels, Tool Materials and Special-Purpose Metals, Metals
Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 3, American Society of Metals, Copyright 1987.

15. A. J ohn Sedriks: Corrosion of Stainless Steels, J ohn Wiley & Sons, New York, 1979.

16. Handbook of Corrosion Data, American Society of Metals, 1989.

17. D. H. Pope, A Study of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Power Plants and a
Practical Guide for Countermeasures, EPRI NP-4582, May 1986.

18. D. R. McIntyre, Experience Survey - Stress-Corrosion Cracking of Austenitic Stainless Steels
in Water, Materials Technology Institute of the Chemical Process Industries, MTI publication
No. 27, St. Louis, MO, February 1987.

19. R. H. J ones, Stress-Corrosion Cracking, American Society for Metals International,
Copyright 1992.

20. J . E. Truman, Methods Available for Avoiding SCC of Austenitic Stainless Steels in
Potentially Dangerous Environments, Stainless Steels, ISI Publication 117, The Iron and Steel
Institute, London, 1969.

21. K. A. Notarianni and M. A. J ackson, Comparison of Fire Sprinkler Piping Materials: Steel,
Copper, Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride and Polybutylene, in Residential and Light Hazard
Installations, FA-150, NISTIR 5339, Federal Emergency Management Agency/United States
Fire Administration, August 1994.

22. S. Crocker and R. C. King, Piping Handbook, Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.

23. O. K. Chopra, Estimation of Fracture Toughness of Cast Stainless Steels During Thermal
Aging in LWR Systems, NUREG/CR-4513, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, D.C., J une 1991.

24. S. Fyfitch, Evaluation of 410SS and 17-4 PH for Nuclear Service, Document 51-1170725-01,
B&W Nuclear Technologies
1
, Lynchburg, VA, March 1989.

25. D. Peckner and I M. Bernstein, Eds., Handbook of Stainless Steels, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1977.

26. PWR Reactor Coolant System License Renewal Industry Report, Project RP2643-32, Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, May 1992.

27. J . A. Charles and F. A. A. Crane, Selection and Use of Engineering Materials, Butterworth-
Heinemann Ltd., Boston, MA, 1991.

28. C.A. Campbell and S. Fyfitch, PWSCC Ranking Model for Alloy 600 Components, Sixth
International Symposium on Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Systems Water-
Reactors, San Diego, CA, August 1-5, 1993.

1

29. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants, Revision 1, EPRI TR-106611, EPRI, EDF, and
Siemens, 1998.

30. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants, EPRI TR-106611, Revision 1, 1998.

31. W.G. Ashbaugh, Corrosion Failures, from ASM International Metals Handbook, Ninth
Edition, Volume 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, Copyright 1986.

32. C.D. Kim, Hydrogen Damage Failures, from ASM International Metals Handbook, Ninth

33. B.E. Wilde, Stress-Corrosion Cracking, from ASM International Metals Handbook, Ninth

34. R.H. Heidersbach, Marine Corrosion, from ASM International Metals Handbook, Ninth
Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, Copyright 1987.

35. D.E. Duvall, Effect of Environment on the Performance of Plastics, from Metals Handbook,
Ninth Edition, Volume 11: Failure Analysis and Prevention, American Society
of Metals (ASM) International, Copyright 2003.

36. Engineered Materials Handbook Desk Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM)

37. Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1,
EPRI Report 1002950, J uly 2003 (successor to TR-114881).

38. F.G. Hammitt, Liquid-Erosion Failures, from ASM International Metals Handbook, Ninth

Appendix C - Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil

The Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil Tool provides a methodology for identifying the aging effects in
portions of systems and components that may be subjected to an internal environment of either
lubricating oil or diesel fuel oil, which includes, but is not limited to, portions of emergency diesel
lube oil and fuel oil systems, safe shutdown diesel lube oil and fuel oil systems, fire protection diesel
fuel oil and lube oil systems, etc. This tool can also be used to evaluate other plant equipment
components whose internal environment is lubricating oil, such as various pumps, turbines, etc., and
to supplement the Heat Exchanger Tool (Appendix G) for the evaluation of the external (shell-side)
surfaces of heat exchanger tubes in a lubricating oil environment.

The materials covered in this tool are stainless steels, carbon and low-alloy steels, aluminum and
aluminum alloys, cast iron, copper and various copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper-nickel), and
non-metals such as glass, plastics, and elastomers.

Lubricating oil systems generally do not suffer appreciable degradation by cracking or loss of
material since the environment is not conducive to corrosion mechanisms. There are some
conditions, however, in which moisture intrusion into the systems can result in an aggressive
environment. The oil tool logic assumes that degradation effects are insignificant for lubricating oil
systems without moisture intrusion.

Fuel oil can be a much more corrosive environment if there should be an intrusion of water during
transportation and storage. MIC is also a potential concern in fuel oil systems. The fuel oil logic
acknowledges the necessity for water contamination before most aging effects can occur.

CONTENTS

Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
2. MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTS ....................................... 2-1
2.1 Materials............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.2 Carbon Steel and Low-Alloy Steel ...................................................................... 2-3
2.1.3 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys....................................................................... 2-3
2.1.4 Cast Iron............................................................................................................... 2-3
2.1.5 Copper and Copper Alloys (Brass, Bronze, and Copper-Nickel)........................ 2-5
2.1.6 Non-Metals.......................................................................................................... 2-5
2.1.7 Coatings and Linings........................................................................................... 2-6
2.2 Environments ..................................................................................................... 2-7
2.2.1 Lubricating Oil..................................................................................................... 2-7
2.2.2 Fuel Oil ................................................................................................................ 2-8
3. AGING EFFECTS .......................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Loss of Material ................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1.5 Erosion................................................................................................................. 3-4
3.1.6 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC).................................................. 3-4
3.1.7 Wear and Fretting................................................................................................ 3-5
3.2 Cracking ............................................................................................................. 3-6
3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage............................................................................................... 3-6
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking................................................................................... 3-7
3.2.3 Vibration.............................................................................................................. 3-8
3.2.4 Mechanical/Thermal Fatigue............................................................................... 3-8
3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness .................................................................... 3-9
3.3.1 Thermal Aging..................................................................................................... 3-9
3.3.2 Radiation Embrittlement...................................................................................... 3-9
3.4 Distortion............................................................................................................ 3-9
3.5 Summary of Potential Aging Effects................................................................ 3-9
3.6 Operating History.............................................................................................. 3-9
3.6.1 NPRDS / EPIX Review..................................................................................... 3-10
3.6.2 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence........................................................ 3-13
3.6.3 Summary of Generic Correspondence............................................................... 3-16
i

ii
4. FLOW DIAGRAM/ SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT.... 4-1
4.1 Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 General................................................................................................................ 4-2
4.3 Tool Descriptions ............................................................................................... 4-2
4.3.1 Lubricating Oil..................................................................................................... 4-3
4.3.2 Fuel Oil ................................................................................................................ 4-3
4.4 GALL Comparison............................................................................................ 4-4
5. REFERENCES................................................................................ 5-1

iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1 Lubricating Oil Tool....................................................................................... 4-16
Figure 2 Fuel Oil Tool .................................................................................................. 4-17

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary................................................................. 3-12
Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Lubricating Oil ..................................................... 4-7
Table 4-2 Aging Effects Summary - Fuel Oil............................................................... 4-11

iv

1. INTRODUCTION

This aging management tool is intended to cover systems and components containing either
lubricating oil or fuel oil. This tool provides a consistent approach to determining various aging
mechanisms and their effects which could prevent the accomplishment of license renewal
intended functions. Although intended to address those systems and components within the scope
of license renewal, the method and approach used make it acceptable to use this tool wherever the
equipment or component internal fluid is oil or fuel oil. While it is acceptable to use on systems and
equipment outside the scope of license renewal, this tool incorporates NPRDS/EPIX equipment
failure history and NRC generic correspondence data only for the systems and equipment within the
scope of license renewal, for reasons other than spatial interaction.

Oil has a variety of applications at nuclear plants, most notably as a lubricant for major rotating
equipment. Examples of equipment containing lube oil include emergency and essential diesel
generator systems, air compressors, turbines, pumps, and various fire system pumps and diesel
generators.

Diesel fuel oil is used as a fuel to power diesel engines that drive generators and diesel driven
pumps. This tool is directly applicable to the majority of components necessary to supply fuel oil to
diesel generators, including the fuel oil storage tanks and supply lines.

In addition to the lube oil and fuel oil systems, fire protection regulations for pressurized water
reactor (PWR) plants require an oil collection system for the reactor coolant pump (RCP) lube oil
systems. The purpose of this collection system is to provide for draining and storing of any RCP
lube oil leakage to reduce the likelihood of a containment fire resulting from that leakage. This tool
can also be applied to the reactor coolant pump and applicable oil collection systems.

The materials of construction of the above described components and systems typically include a
number of alloys. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and stainless steel are typically used for piping,
tanks, pressure vessels, and heat exchangers (heat exchangers are covered separately in
Appendix G). Oil and fuel oil system piping and fittings are fabricated from carbon steel, stainless
steel, copper and copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper-nickel), aluminum and aluminum alloys,
and cast iron. Non-metallic materials such as glass and plastics may also be used in applications
such as sight glasses, level gages, tanks, piping, etc. and elastomers may be used in flexible
connections/hoses. Consumable non-metallic materials used for gaskets, packing, O-rings, and seals
are excluded from aging management, as described in Section 2.2 of the main document
(implementation guideline).

The materials and environments covered in the Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil Tool are discussed in
Section 2.0. Aging effects, and the mechanisms that can lead to those effects, that apply to the
material and environment combinations are discussed in Section 3.0. The development of the
evaluation flow chart and logic and associated summary tables is presented in Section 4.0.

Applicable aging effects include loss of material, cracking, change in material properties (e.g.,
reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), and loss of mechanical closure integrity. Loss of
mechanical closure integrity is not addressed in this tool, but is treated separately in Appendix F
Oil and Fuel Oil - Appendix C 1-1

(Bolted Closure Tool). This tool is restricted to internal environment and material combinations.
Aging effects for the external surface of components containing oil or fuel oil are addressed in
Appendix E. Evaluation of heat exchangers is performed with the tool contained in Appendix G.
Likewise, the evaluation of fatigue cracking is addressed in Appendix H and is not covered in this
tool.


2. MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTS

The oil and fuel oil tool is intended to assist the evaluator in determining locations within oil and
fuel oil systems that may be susceptible to one or more of the following aging effects: cracking, loss
of material, and change in material properties (e.g., reduction in fracture toughness, distortion). This
oil and fuel oil tool is not intended to cover portions of equipment such as bearings and rotating
pieces associated with purely active functions (as outlined in the Implementation Guideline, the
mechanical tools are intended to cover only those components that perform their intended
function(s) in a passive manner).

As such, this tool evaluates the pressure boundary components of the various lube oil and fuel oil
systems, which include tanks, piping, pump casings, valve bodies, instruments, and fittings.
Although heat exchangers are specifically addressed in Appendix G, this tool can be used to
complement the heat exchanger tool for certain portions of heat exchangers where the materials and
environments reflect those covered by this tool.

The materials addressed in this tool are discussed in Section 2.1 and the various environments are
described in Section 2.2.

2.1 Materials

A majority of the piping and components in systems containing oil or fuel oil are constructed of
carbon steel. Lube oil systems consist of various pumps, piping, branch connections, and fittings,
and typically include lube oil coolers. Fuel systems include storage tanks, piping, valves, and
pumps. Appendix G is intended to specifically cover heat exchangers, including lube oil coolers.
For completeness, this oil and fuel oil tool includes the more common tubing materials used in
coolers, which include stainless steel, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and copper and copper
alloys. The underground tanks in diesel generator fuel supply systems are either carbon steel or
stainless steel. The carbon steel tanks may be lined to prevent corrosion of the tank internal surface.
This tool includes the evaluation of both lined and unlined tanks. The external surfaces are
addressed in Appendix E.

The reactor coolant pump (RCP) oil collection systems on PWRs are typically constructed of carbon
steel with carbon steel collection tanks. Normally exposed to containment atmosphere, the oil
collection systems may frequently collect other liquids (such as water from decontamination
activities) and impurities.

The materials addressed in this tool include (1) wrought and cast stainless steels, including weld
metals, (2) carbon steels and low-alloy steels, (3) aluminum and aluminum alloys, (4) cast iron, and
(5) copper and copper alloys (brass, bronze and copper-nickel).



The stainless steels covered in the oil and fuel oil tool are divided into the following categories: (1)
wrought stainless steels, (2) cast stainless steels, and (3) weld metals. Each is discussed below.

Wrought stainless steels are commonly divided into five groups: (1) austenitic, (2) ferritic, (3)
martensitic, (4) precipitation hardening, and (5) duplex stainless steels. Definitions of these groups
of stainless steels are provided in Reference 1 and are not repeated here. Martensitic and
precipitation hardening stainless steels are typically used for bolting, valve stems, and pump shafts,
and are not evaluated in this tool. [Note: valve stems and pump shafts are not subject to aging
management review in accordance with the discussion in Section 2.0 of the Implementation
Guideline. Bolted closures are addressed in Appendix F.]

The cast stainless steels addressed in this oil and fuel oil tool all contain ferrite in an austenitic
matrix (i.e., CF series) and are commonly known as cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS). Typical
alloys used in nuclear applications include CF-8 (and CF-8A) and CF-8M which are the cast
counterparts of wrought Types 304 and 316, respectively. Other castings include CF-3 and CF-3M,
which are the cast counterparts of Types 304L and 316L, respectively. Alloys CF-3M and CF-8M
are modifications of CF-3 and CF-8 containing 2% to 3% molybdenum and a slightly higher nickel
content to enhance resistance to corrosion and pitting. CF-8A is a modification to CF-8, in that a
controlled amount of ferrite imparts higher tensile properties.

The welding materials used to join stainless steels depend upon the type of material being joined.
For example, Type 304 wrought austenitic stainless steels may be joined using either gas metal-arc
welding (GMAW), submerged-arc welding (SAW), or shielded metal-arc welding (SMAW)
processes with a Type 308 electrode or welding rod. The various welding processes used to join
wrought stainless steels include SMAW, SAW, GMAW, Gas Tungsten-Arc Welding (GTAW), and
plasma-arc welding (PAW). Flux core arc welding (FCAW) may have been used but to a lesser
extent. Stainless steel welding processes typically used include SMAW, GTAW, GMAW, and
electroslag [2].

The weld metal is assumed to be equivalent to the wrought austenitic stainless steels with respect to
loss of material and resistance to cracking (initiation), as discussed in Section 3.0. However, it
should be noted that strength and toughness of selected stainless steel weld metals used to join
wrought stainless steels were shown to vary depending upon the welding process [4]. For example,
flux welds, such as SAW and SMAW, were shown to provide joint properties with higher strength
and significantly lower toughness than the surrounding base metal. Higher strength of the weld
metal results in enhanced load bearing capacity compared to base metal; lower toughness of the
weld metal may result in a reduced ability to support structural loads if a crack develops in the weld
metal. The strength and toughness of non-flux welds, such as GMAW and GTAW, were shown to
be similar to the base metal.


2.1.2 Carbon Steel and Low-Alloy Steel

Carbon steel is used throughout nuclear plants in various applications. It is used where high
corrosion resistance is not required and is the material of choice for pumps, valves, tanks, and
fittings in most plant oil and fuel oil systems. The term carbon steel as used in the aging evaluations
of this tool applies to all carbon and low-alloy steels.


Aluminum has limited use in nuclear plant applications. Due to its high resistance to corrosion in
many environments, it is found in various oil and fuel oil system applications. Typical applications
of aluminum in oil or fuel oil systems include instruments and heat exchangers. Aluminum and
aluminum alloy products are available in both cast (xxx.x series) and wrought (xxxx series) product
forms, with most alloy compositions available in both.

2.1.4 Cast Iron

The term cast iron identifies a large family of ferrous alloys. Cast iron typically contains more than
2% carbon and from 1 to 3% silicon. The four basic types of cast iron are (1) white iron, (2) gray
iron, (3) ductile iron, and (4) malleable iron. White cast irons have high compressive strength and
good retention of strength and hardness at elevated temperature; they are most often used for their
excellent resistance to wear and abrasion. Gray cast iron has several unique properties because of
flake graphite in the microstructure. Gray iron can be machined easily at hardnesses conducive to
good wear resistance. It has outstanding properties for applications involving vibrational damping
or moderate thermal shock. Ductile cast iron is similar to gray iron in composition, but during
casting of ductile iron, magnesium and cerium are added to the molten iron, which nodularizes the
graphite giving the final product higher strength and ductility. Malleable iron has similar properties
to ductile iron, however, it is more expensive to manufacture and is only used for thin section
castings, and for parts requiring maximum machinability or where a high modulus of elasticity is
required.

This oil and fuel oil tool evaluates only the more widely used white and gray cast iron alloys.
Although comprising two general categories, various alloying elements can and are added to cast
iron alloys to promote an array of hardness, corrosion resistance, heat resistance, and abrasion
resistance properties [3].

White Cast Iron


Gray Cast Iron
found in raw water systems (particularly in fire suppression water systems). In these iron alloys, the
carbon is above the solubility limit of austenite at the eutectic temperature [17]. During cooling and
solidification, a substantial portion of the carbon content separates out of the liquid and forms flakes
of graphite. This material is usually selected because of the relatively low cost and ease of
machining and excellent resistance to wear [7]. Another attribute of this material is its ability to be
cast in thin sections. Gray cast iron alloys also contain outstanding properties for applications
involving vibrational damping or moderate thermal shock.

Ductile Cast Iron
graphite spheres [6, 21]. Nickel, chromium, and/or copper can be added to improve material
strength and hardenability properties. Larger amounts of silicon, chromium, nickel, or copper can
also be added for improved resistance to corrosion or for high-temperature applications [6].

Malleable Irons
Malleable iron is white cast iron that is heat treated to form graphite clusters instead of flakes, thus
increasing the ductility of the material. Malleable iron and ductile iron are used in similar
applications where ductility and toughness are required, when cost and availability are the primary
selection criteria.

Compacted Graphite Cast Iron
This type of cast iron is manufactured by very carefully controlling the amount of magnesium added
as an inoculant in a process very similar to the process used to make ductile iron. Impact and fatigue
properties, although not as good as ductile iron, are substantially better than those of gray cast iron.
The combination of high strength and good impact resistance, coupled with a good capacity for heat
dissipation, makes CG irons well suited for applications where neither gray nor ductile iron is
entirely satisfactory [21].

Alloy Cast Irons
heat resistance, and mechanical properties. However, these alloys are not widely used in the nuclear

excellent high temperature properties. Silicon content above 14% yields an alloy that is extremely

resistant to corrosion, particularly in acidic environments [7]. Corrosion resistance can be increased
in white, gray, or nodular iron by adding nickel, chromium, and copper (or a combination thereof) or
silicon in excess of 3% [17]. These alloying elements promote the formation of a strongly protective
surface film under oxidizing conditions (such as exposure to acids). High nickel alloys containing
greater than 12% nickel provide excellent resistance to corrosion and heat. (These high nickel
alloys also contain 1 to 6% chromium and as much as 10% copper which enhance corrosion resistant
properties.) The addition of copper results in better resistance to sulfuric acid and atmospheric
corrosion. The high abrasion resistance and excellent corrosion resistance of high chromium white
irons have resulted in the development of a several alloys containing 20 to 35% chromium [17].

However, due to the specialized nature of the alloys, the availability, and the cost, they have a very
limited application at most plants.

2.1.5 Copper and Copper Alloys (Brass, Bronze, and Copper-Nickel)

Bronze and brass are copper alloys using predominantly copper, tin, and zinc with various other
alloying agents present in differing amounts. Brass is an alloy composed of copper and zinc, with
other metals in varying lesser amounts. Bronze is any of various alloys composed of copper and tin,
sometimes with traces of other metals. Other copper alloys are used in various applications, most
notably copper-nickel alloys in condenser and heat exchanger tubing material.

compositions available in both. Brasses and bronzes containing tin, lead, and/or zinc have only
and silicon brasses/bronzes are used where higher strength alloys are required. Various brass and
bronze alloys are used in a number of applications at nuclear plants. Due to their corrosion
resistance, copper and copper alloys are used to some extent in oil and fuel oil applications and are
covered in this tool.

2.1.6 Non-Metals

crystallization. Hydrofluoric acid and caustic attack glass, and it shows a slight attack in hot water.
Uniform, selective, or localized attack can occur. When hot water attacks glass, it is not dissolved in
the usual sense; it hydrolytically decomposes. Resistance to water varies from excellent to poor
depending on the glass composition. There are a wide variety of glass compositions with modifiers,
fluxes, and stabilizers added to obtain various properties, including corrosion resistance [7].
Fiberglass is often used for underground tanks of petroleum products because of its corrosion
resistance. Furthermore, silica is almost insoluble in an aqueous environment except at temperatures
in excess of 482F. Acid attack of soda-lime and borosilicate glass compositions is minimal due to
the formation of protective, highly siliceous surface layer, except for hydrofluoric and phosphoric
acids (at high temperatures) [22]. No definitive instances of glass failure due to an aging effect have
been recorded in industry operating experience searches. Lubricating oil and fuel oil environments
do not contain hydrofluoric acids or caustics, nor would glass be exposed to hot water in these
environments.

Non-metallic materials such as plastics are also used where temperatures, pressures, and stresses are
moisture absorption, loss in mechanical properties, hardening, and discoloration. When compared to
metals and alloys, plastics are weaker, more resistant to chloride ions, less resistant to oxidizing
acids, less resistant to solvents, and have much lower temperature limitations [7]. Polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) is a thermoplastic material composed of polymers of vinyl chloride. Manufactured
from sodium chloride (NaCl) and natural gas, PVC is relatively unaffected by water, concentrated
alkalis, and non-oxidizing acids, oils, and ozone [20]. Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) is a member
of the fluorocarbon family of plastics and is a homopolymer of vinylidene fluoride. Extruded as
pipe, it is rigid and resists abrasion, as well as being chemically resistant, especially to halogens.

acceptability for the use of thermoplastics within a lubrication and fuel oil environment is a design
driven criterion. Once the appropriate material is chosen, the material will have no aging effects in
the lubrication or fuel oil environment. Aging effects such as UV radiation on the external surface
of plastics are addressed in Appendix E.

Elastomers are defined as rubber or polymers that have properties similar to those of rubber. They
are used in nuclear plants in various capacities, such as joint sealants, flexible connections/hoses and
moisture barriers. For a complete discussion of the aging effects of typical elastomers used in
nuclear plants, the user of this tool is referred to EPRI report 1002950, Aging Effects for Structures
and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [18]. Furthermore, certain elastomers
such as natural rubbers and ethylene-propylene-diene (EPDM) are not resistant to fuel oil or
lubricating oil [23] and only qualified elastomers, that are resistant, are used for oil or fuel oil
service.

Therefore, based on industry operating experience review, the assumption of proper design and
application of the material, and considering that the oil and fuel oil environments do not typically
include contaminants or conditions that would result in the degradation of glass (including
fiberglass), thermoplastics, and elastomers, aging of these materials is not a concern in lubrication
oil and fuel oil environments.

2.1.7 Coatings and Linings

Lining or coating of plant components (e.g., fuel oil storage tanks and piping) has proven effective
in providing resistance to corrosion. There are several forms of organic, inorganic, and metallic
coatings and/or linings that are available with varying degrees of protection, permeability, and
lifetime. The durability of a coating/lining is directly related to the preparation of the surface [12]
and in some cases localized separation of the coating from the component (holidays) will occur.
Without cathodic protection or corrosion inhibition, all of the galvanic forces will be focused on the
holiday, causing rapid corrosion of the material [12]. With either cathodic protection or additives to
protect against corrosion, the effects of corrosive mechanisms on lined/coated material are
minimized [12]. Because of the various types and associated life expectancies, it is essential that

linings/coatings and cathodic protection have appropriate inspections and/or adjustments to fully
credit these design attributes. Therefore, this tool does not take credit for any programmatic systems
(such as protective coatings) in its determination of applicable aging effect for a given environment
so that no such program or activity is implicitly credited for managing the effects of aging in oil and
fuel oil environments. The effectiveness of any program or activity that is credited with aging
management must be demonstrated as described in Section 4.0 of the implementation guideline and
is outside the scope of this tool.

While all coatings/liners can exhibit localized failure as a result of surface preparation, finish,
original application, physical damage, etc., Epoxy Phenolic coatings used on the lower portion of
some fuel oil storage tanks have exhibited a high failure rate. Periodic inspection of Epoxy Phenolic
coatings is warranted as a result of the extensive peeling and flaking observed with these coatings.

2.2 Environments

This oil and fuel oil tool includes consideration of various hydrocarbon-based environments,
specifically, for the lubricating oil and fuel oil systems and components. A major portion of the
environments considered by this tool are associated with the diesel fuel systems and lubricating oil
systems for the emergency diesel generators, the diesel driven fire protection pump, and diesel
driven high pressure core spray pumps (some BWRs) or other diesel driven equipment in the scope
of license renewal. The environments considered by this tool also are intended to cover the various
component pressure boundaries of other plant rotating machinery that is exposed to lubricating oil
and include the lubricating oil portions of large pumps, turbines, and compressors that are within the
scope of license renewal. Some of these diesel generators, pumps, turbines, and compressors use
forced lube oil systems, which include oil coolers, pump housings, oil piping, and valve bodies.
Others without forced oil lubrication systems may only have an oil housing and oil cooler that are
pressure boundary components addressed by this tool.

The reactor coolant pump lube oil collection system on PWRs is normally subjected to the
containment atmosphere. This pump oil can at times leak, and the oil collection system will be
exposed to this leaking oil environment. Because of the location of the oil collection system and the
various designs at the different plants, the oil collection systems can be subjected to very different
environments including condensation, oil leakage, and ambient containment environment. No single
tool is capable of evaluating all these different environments and a combination of tools may be
necessary depending on the plant-specific equipment design and the applicable environments.

2.2.1 Lubricating Oil

Metals are not corroded by the hydrocarbon components of lubricants, although corrosion does
occur under certain conditions as the result of the presence of impurities or additives in lubricants
and as a result of the development of oil oxidation products [6]. Lubricating oils are not good
electrolytes and the oil film on the wetted surfaces of components tends to minimize the potential for
corrosion [6, 9]. Moisture contamination and the use of additives can, however, cause corrosion.
Copper and copper alloys, for example, may be attacked by oxidized oil and active sulfur
compounds, especially in the presence of small amounts of water. Extreme pressure lubricants

containing chloride compounds have, in some cases, caused serious corrosion of ferrous steel
housings caused by HCl liberation from the additive; this is most severe when the service includes
high temperature operation followed by cooling [6]. One of the functions of almost all lubricants is
the prevention of corrosion in the lubricating system by water [6].

The purity of the diesel generator lubricating oil systems is maintained at most plants and the fluid is
chemically analyzed periodically. Where periodic testing and monitoring of lubrication oil in other
equipment is performed, contamination would also likely be detected. Contamination of the oil in
normally operating equipment such as makeup and service/raw water pumps may be introduced
while performing equipment active functions subsequent to bearing failure, excessive vibration, or
other causes. For equipment not normally in operation during full power operation (e.g., DHR/RHR
pumps, High/Low Pressure Spray pumps, etc.) periodic testing of the equipment, in conjunction
with an oil sampling program, should be able to detect any water contamination of the oil.

2.2.2 Fuel Oil

Diesel fuel oil is delivered to plants in tanker trucks and is stored in large tanks to provide an on-site
available supply of diesel fuel for a specified period of diesel generator operation, typically 7 days.
Fuel oil is supplied to the generators through pumps, valves, and piping. Strainers/filters and other
equipment assure that the diesel fuel supplied to the generators is clean and free of contaminants.
Different additives may be in the diesel fuel dependent on the different grades and refiners of the
product. In addition, utilities may add fuel additives such as biocides and corrosion inhibitors to the
fuel.

Water and other contaminants, such as chlorides and sulfides, occur naturally in crude oil. While
fuel oil in its purest refined form contains little if any moisture, water contamination can occur
during storage and transportation. Diesel generator fuel oil can be sampled for water prior to being
added to the fuel oil storage system, which precludes significant moisture accumulation during
transportation. However, this sampling is not credited with preventing water intrusion, so no
program or activity is implicitly credited for managing the effects of aging in fuel oil. Furthermore,
in the case of storage tanks that are vented to the atmosphere, high humidity or precipitation can lead
to some small amount of water intrusion into the fuel oil system. This water contamination,
naturally occurring contaminants, and any fuel additives can produce an environment which is
corrosive [9]. Chlorides and sulfides are especially damaging contaminants.

Several forms of fungus and other microorganisms can survive and multiply in hydrocarbon fuels.
These organisms can occur in all areas of the fuel handling system and need only trace amounts of
minerals and water to sustain their growth [12]. Their growth chemically alters the fuel by
producing sludge, acids, and other by-products of metabolism. There are numerous methods to
control fungi and microorganisms. The addition of biocides together with regular cleaning of the
tanks is one such method.


3. AGING EFFECTS

This oil and fuel oil tool addresses aging effects that result from aging mechanisms described in
various aging management guidelines, technical references, and other industry sources. Where
specific mechanisms are not applicable under the environmental and material conditions covered by
this tool, justification is provided for a not applicable determination. For those effects that are
applicable, a detailed discussion of the environmental conditions necessary for the effects to be
manifested is included.

Aging effects discussed below include loss of material, cracking, and change in material properties
(e.g., reduction of fracture toughness, and distortion). When performing an evaluation of a material
and environment combination, if one or more of the aging mechanisms is plausible, then the aging
effect is assumed to be applicable for the period of extended operation.

Each of the various aging mechanisms is discussed below for the environments and for the materials
listed in Section 2.1 and 2.2. For the most part, aging effects are not observed in fuel oil and
lubricating oil systems unless moisture or other contaminants are present.


Loss of material (i.e., corrosion) is defined as the deterioration of a material because of
electrochemical reaction with its environment. Lubricating oils and fuel oils in their pure form are
non-aggressive and non-corrosive for all metals [13]. For the most part, the corrosion mechanisms
discussed below require water contamination to provide an environment conducive to their initiation
and progression. Some of the mechanisms also require that other contaminants (e.g., chlorides or
sulfides) are present to support that particular mechanism. Unless specifically controlled or
monitored, it is likely that additives to lubricating oils and fuel will contain sufficient levels of
aggressive species such that, in the presence of water, corrosion will occur. Stagnant conditions are
also necessary for many corrosion mechanisms.


material dissolution and sometimes corrosion product buildup [8]. At ordinary temperatures and in
neutral or near neutral media, oxygen and moisture are necessary for the corrosion of iron and
carbon steel. In the presence of oxygen and moisture, carbon and low-alloy steels and cast iron are
susceptible to general corrosion, while stainless steels and aluminum and aluminum alloys are
resistant to general corrosion [8].

Copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper nickel) may be attacked not only by oxidized oil, but also
by the active sulfur compounds which may be present [6]. However, most modern, well refined
lubricants give little trouble with copper and in pure form will not corrode copper alloys. Although
lubricants may tend to corrode materials under some conditions, they afford considerable protection
against corrosion caused by the presence of moisture, and, where necessary, a high degree of antirust
protection is achieved by the use of additives [6].

In summary, very little general corrosion occurs in oil and fuel oil systems because the oxygen
content is very low and oil/fuel is not a good electrolyte. To assist in corrosion prevention,
purification systems are usually installed and/or corrosion inhibitors are added to maintain these
fluids free of corrosion products [7]. However, where water and other contamination are present and
the water and contamination settles in stagnant areas such as tanks and the bottom of heat
exchangers, general corrosion of carbon steel and low-alloy steel and cast iron can be a significant
aging concern.


the presence of an electrolyte [6]. However, lubricating oils and fuel oil, even in the contaminated
condition, are not good conducting electrolytes [9]. Some situations may exist, however, in which
water and/or contamination may enter the oil or fuel oil systems. Under stagnant conditions, these
contaminants may settle and separate due to the different fluid densities. Under such conditions, the
water and any other contaminants will be in contact with the component material and a good
conducting electrolyte can exist. This is most likely to occur in fuel oil storage tanks or system low
points rather than in the flowing portions of systems.

Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, and aluminum and aluminum alloys in contact with a more
cathodic (noble) material in the galvanic series are susceptible to galvanic corrosion in the presence
of an electrolyte, such as in a location where moisture can condense and collect. Copper and copper
alloys are in the middle of the galvanic series, with steel, alloy steel, cast iron, and aluminum and its
alloys being more anodic (or active) and the stainless steels being more cathodic (or passive).
Therefore, copper and copper alloys in contact with a stainless steel are susceptible to galvanic
corrosion in the presence of an electrolyte.


Crevices concentrate contaminants above levels of the bulk fluid environment, leading to
accelerated corrosion known as crevice corrosion. Crevice corrosion can affect all metals and
such as gasket surfaces, lap joints, and under bolt heads [7]. Crevice corrosion is strongly dependent
on the presence of dissolved oxygen and an aggressive environment. Oxygen is required for crevice
corrosion initiation. However, once initiated, a bulk fluid oxygen level or the presence of
contaminants such as chlorides to sustain the chemical reaction is necessary for the continued
corrosion in the crevice [7]. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, stainless steel, aluminum and
aluminum alloys, and copper and copper alloys are all susceptible, to some degree, to crevice
corrosion [17].

Crevice corrosion of copper and copper alloys is a result of oxygen depletion in the crevices such
that the crevice metal is anodic relative to metal outside the crevice that is exposed to an oxygen-
bearing environment [21]. For most copper metals, the location of the attack is generally outside the
crevice, immediately adjacent the crevice region. It can result from the accumulation of rust,
permeable scales or deposit of corrosion products at the crevice location. Copper zinc alloys with
less than 15% Zn exhibit high resistance to crevice corrosion whereas copper zinc alloys with

greater than 15% Zn are susceptible [21]. When the aluminum content of aluminum copper alloys is
greater than 8% the aluminum is present in what is referred to as the alpha-beta phase, which is
much less resistant to corrosion than the alpha phase aluminum present in bronzes containing less
than 8% aluminum.

As discussed above, oil and fuel oil are not good electrolytes unless water and other contaminants
are present. In flowing systems, even if contaminated, water and contaminants cannot accumulate in
crevices to a significant extent and crevice corrosion is not expected to be a significant aging
concern under flowing conditions. Crevice corrosion is, therefore, only a concern for stainless steel,
aluminum and aluminum alloys, carbon and low allow steel, cast iron, and high zinc (>15%) and
aluminum bronze (>8% Al) copper alloys under stagnant conditions where water contamination is
present.


Pitting is localized attack that is very destructive because it causes equipment to fail with only a
small percent weight loss of the entire structure. Pitting corrosion rates are very unpredictable.
Failures are due to intense corrosion, which sometimes occurs with extreme suddenness [7]. Pits
typically exhibit a long incubation period before they are made evident. In some instances pitting
corrosion can initially occur at a high rate, but then display a very low corrosion rate as corrosion
product buildup depletes the oxygen supply in the pit. Pit growth is also unique because it can be
autocatalytic or self-stimulating and self-propagating once started [9].

Pitting corrosion is an aggressive corrosion mechanism that is more common with passive materials
such as austenitic stainless steels and aluminum/aluminum alloys than with non-passive materials
which include carbon/alloy steels and cast iron. Most materials of interest are susceptible to pitting
corrosion under certain conditions. Most pitting is associated with halide ionschlorides,
bromides, and hypochlorites being prevalent [7].

Pitting is an aging mechanism for copper and copper alloys as with most commercial metals. Pitting
can occur either as localized or general attack. Localized attack takes the form of various shapes
and sizes and is typically concentrated on surface locations at which the protective film has been
broken, and where non-protective deposits of scale, dirt, or other substances are present [21].
General pitting takes the form of a roughened and irregular appearance over the entire material
surface. Pitting and crevice corrosion are similar corrosion mechanisms, with crevice corrosion
sometimes considered localized pitting in a crevice. While copper alloys are generally resistant to
pitting and crevice corrosion, copper zinc alloys with greater than 15% Zn are susceptible.
Aluminum bronzes with greater than 8% Al are considered susceptible to pitting under stagnant or
low flow conditions.

Corrosion of aluminum and aluminum alloys is localized and usually manifested by random
formation of pits. Pitting of aluminum (and aluminum alloys) is most commonly produced by halide
ions, of which chloride is the most frequently encountered in service. In the presence of oxygen the
metal is readily polarized to its pitting potential. In the absence of dissolved oxygen or other
cathodic reactant, aluminum (and aluminum alloys) will not corrode by pitting as it is not polarized
to its pitting potential [17].

Oil and fuel oil are not good electrolytes, and water and aggressive species are necessary to
propagate this corrosion mechanism. Therefore, pitting corrosion is an aging concern for carbon and
low-alloy steel, cast iron, stainless steel, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and high zinc (>15%) and
aluminum bronze (>8% Al) copper alloys under stagnant conditions where water contamination is
present.

3.1.5 Erosion

Erosion is the loss of material due to a flowing fluid. Impingement and solid particle erosion is
caused by the impact of particles or liquid on a material. Elbows or T-type joints where the fluid
flow changes direction are particularly susceptible to erosion [7].

This mechanism is typically not applicable to oil flow at the flow rates and conditions in nuclear
plant oil and fuel oil systems and equipment.

3.1.6 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC)

Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) is corrosive attack caused by microbiological activity
and usually occurs at temperatures between 50 and 120
o
F; however, it can occur at temperatures up
to 210
o
F. Microbiological organisms disrupt the metals protective oxide layer, produce corrosive
substances, and deposit solids that accelerate the electrolytic reactions of corrosive attack, generally
in the form of pitting or crevice corrosion. The bacteria of concern can be either aerobic or
anaerobic. MIC is facilitated by stagnant conditions, fouling, internal crevices, contact with
untreated water from a natural source, and contact with contaminated soils. MIC damage to the
exterior of components (e.g., owing to contact with contaminated soils) is covered in Appendix E.

Several forms of fungus and other microorganisms can survive and multiply in hydrocarbon fuels
[12]. This growth may occur in all areas of the system: storage tanks, pump trucks, delivery lines,
and fuel tanks. When the fuel oil or lubricating oil is agitated, as would occur during tank filling,
growth may be distributed throughout the system. These microorganisms use fuel oil as their main
food source and only require trace amounts of minerals and water to sustain their growth. The by-
products of their metabolism produce a corrosive environment, which can lead to corrosion.

While MIC contamination is possible in lubricating oil applications, the likelihood of MIC causing
extensive damage in lube oil systems is minimal. Even if contamination of the oil occurs, the
relatively clean systems and addition of corrosion inhibitors to the lubrication oil does not provide an
environment conducive to microorganism growth. The potential for MIC growth and subsequent
corrosion effects in lube oil systems appears to be very small based on the addition of lube oil
corrosion additives, oil purity testing programs, and the extremely low likelihood of lube oil
contamination. Even if MIC were to be introduced into these systems, the sampling programs are
likely to detect and correct the situation prior to MIC causing any appreciable corrosion of lube oil
system components.

MIC has been found in fuel oil systems and, if left untreated, can cause extensive damage to piping
and components. MIC can affect nearly all materials of interest [14, 15]. MIC is a concern for fuel
oil systems and components due to the potential for microorganism introduction and moisture

contamination during bulk fuel oil supply, delivery, and storage. The addition of a biocide at the
fuel oil source and the fuel oil system, when properly monitored and controlled, eliminates the
microorganisms necessary to induce this type of corrosion.

In summary, MIC is an applicable aging mechanism for carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron,
stainless steel, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and copper and copper alloys in fuel oil systems but
is not considered applicable in lubricating oil systems.


Wear can result from the movement of a material in relation to another material. This can occur
during a components performance of active functions, which are not addressed by this tool (e.g., air
compressor, pump, or valve operations). Wear can also occur as a result of movement on the
external surfaces of equipment. External component wear is covered in Appendix E.

Fretting is caused by small amplitude vibratory motion [e.g., flow induced vibration (FIV)] which
results in removal of material between two contacting surfaces [7]. With the exception of heat
exchangers, passive components in systems containing oil and fuel oil are not susceptible to this
mechanism. Heat exchangers are discussed in Appendix G. General wear and fretting are,
therefore, not applicable to the equipment covered by this oil and fuel oil tool.


most common example is the selective removal of zinc in brass alloys (dezincification). Common
yellow brass (30% zinc and 70% copper) is most susceptible to this mechanism. Lower zinc levels
and the addition of small amounts of alloying elements such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic, and
antimony effectively inhibits dezincification; 1% tin added to brass, for example, significantly
reduce the susceptibility of the material [7, 21]. There are two general types of dezincification:
uniform attack and localized plug attack. In both types of dezincification, the zinc ions stay in
solution, while the copper plates back on. The dissolved zinc can then corrode slowly by the
cathodic reduction of water into hydrogen gas and hydroxide ions [7]. For this reason,
in the presence of oxygen. Prolonged contact with waters high in oxygen, carbon dioxide (CO2), or
chloride can result in dezincification (a galvanic process) of susceptible materials and is frequently
encountered with quiescent or slow moving solutions. Slightly acidic water, low in salt content and
at room temperature, is likely to produce uniform attack, but neutral or alkaline water, high in salt
content and above room temperature, often produces plug-type attack [17].

Gray cast iron can also display the effects of selective leaching particularly in relatively mild
environments. This process initiates with selective leaching of the iron or steel matrix leaving the
graphitic network. The graphite is cathodic to iron, providing an excellent galvanic cell. The iron is
environment that corrodes this metal rapidly (e.g., saltwater) uniform corrosion can occur with a
rapid loss of material strength which can be undetected, since the corrosion appears superficial [7].

Aluminum bronze can be subject to de-alloying similar to the dezincification of brass. Aluminum
brasses are used to resist impingement attack where turbulent high velocity saline water is the fluid.
These alloys form a tough corrosion resistant protective coating due to the buildup of aluminum
oxide. Proper quench and temper treatments for some of the aluminum bronzes produces a tempered
structure that is superior in corrosion resistance to the normal annealed structures. Unless they are
inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As, aluminum brasses are susceptible to selective leaching.

Oil and fuel oil are not good electrolytes [9]. As discussed in the above sections, the intrusion of
moisture into these systems is required for selective leaching to be a concern. As such, selective
leaching is an applicable mechanism for gray cast iron, brass and bronze (>15% Zn) copper alloys,
and aluminum bronze (>8% Al) in oil and fuel oil environments in locations where any moisture
can condense and/or collect such as the bottom of tanks and heat exchangers and in low points of the
system.

3.2 Cracking

more of the following aging mechanisms: hydrogen damage, stress corrosion cracking, vibration,
and fatigue.


Hydrogen damage results from absorption of hydrogen into the metal. It includes the following
degradation mechanisms:

Decarburization
Hydrogen attack
Hydrogen blistering
Hydrogen embrittlement

Decarburization, or the removal of carbon from steel, is produced by moist hydrogen at high
temperatures. Decarburization is extremely slow below 1,000
o
C [6], which is significantly above
the temperatures seen by nuclear plant oil and fuel oil components.

Hydrogen attack refers to the interaction between hydrogen and a component of an alloy at high
temperatures. Examples include the disintegration of oxygen-containing copper in the presence of
hydrogen, and methane-induced fissuring of steels [7]. Hydrogen attack occurs at temperatures
above those experienced at nuclear plants.

Hydrogen blistering occurs as a result of the diffusion of monatomic hydrogen into voids
in a metal. The atomic hydrogen then combines to form molecular hydrogen, which is unable to
diffuse through the metal. The concentration and pressure of hydrogen gas in the void then
increases with a resultant blistering of material. This mechanism is most prevalent in the petroleum
industry where chemical reactions during the refining process produce significant levels of atomic
hydrogen [7]. Hydrogen blistering can also occur where cathodic protection of tanks or other

components is used, but only if the voltage is incorrectly set. Carbon and low-alloy steels are
susceptible, while stainless steels are much less susceptible. The industry experience search
identified no incidences of hydrogen blistering in nuclear plant systems or equipment.

Hydrogen embrittlement is the degradation of material mechanical properties as a result of
absorption of atomic hydrogen into the material. As with hydrogen blistering, embrittlement
requires the presence of monatomic hydrogen produced by a chemical process. High strength steels
are the most susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement, with the greatest susceptibility occurring around
70
o
F. The susceptibility decreases rapidly as the temperature varies above and below 70
o
F [6, 8].
Alloying with nickel or molybdenum reduces susceptibility [6, 8]. Therefore, the stainless steels are
considered immune to hydrogen embrittlement. The nuclear industry experience search did not
identify any incidence of hydrogen embrittlement in oil or fuel oil applications.

In summary, potential hydrogen damage in oil and fuel oil systems can consist of hydrogen
blistering and hydrogen embrittlement. Both occur primarily in the petrochemical industry during
the refining process. It is not expected that equipment within the scope of this tool will experience
the corrosive environment necessary for hydrogen damage. Therefore, hydrogen damage is not an
applicable aging mechanism for nuclear plant components exposed to fuel oil, unless plant-specific
operating experience shows prolonged or recurring use of cathodic protection for fuel oil storage
tanks with an incorrect voltage setting.


Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) is a mechanism requiring a tensile stress, a corrosive environment,
and a susceptible material. Intergranular attack (IGA) is similar to stress corrosion cracking except
that stress is not necessary for it to proceed. Piping carbon steels are considered resistant to SCC
when the yield strength is less than 100 ksi [15]. Since the yield strength of most piping used is in
the 30-45 ksi range, SCC is not considered applicable to piping carbon steels.

The detailed evaluation and identification of operational and residual stresses are beyond the scope
of this tool. It is assumed that the materials within the scope of this tool contain sufficient stresses
to initiate stress corrosion cracking given an environment conducive to the progression of either
SCC or IGA.

SCC of Stainless Steel (Wrought and Cast)
SCC and IGA have occurred in stainless steel typically in water systems containing dissolved oxygen,
sulfates, fluorides, or chlorides. In general, SCC very rarely occurs in austenitic stainless steels below
140F [16]. Although SCC has been observed in stagnant, oxygenated borated water systems at lower
temperatures than this 140F threshold, all of these instances have identified a significant presence of
contaminants (halogens, specifically chlorides) in the failed components. With a harsh enough
environment (significant contamination), SCC can occur in austenitic stainless steel at ambient
temperature. However, these conditions are considered event driven, resulting from a breakdown of
chemistry controls.


The presence of oxidizers often has a pronounced effect on cracking tendencies. In fact, the presence of
dissolved oxygen or other oxidizing species is critical to the cracking in all chloride solutions. If the
oxygen is removed, cracking will only occur if the chloride concentration is very high [6].

Pure aluminum is not susceptible to SCC/IGA; however, aluminum alloys are very susceptible to
cracking under mild corrosive environments [7]. Aluminum alloys containing more than 12% zinc
or more than 6% magnesium are susceptible to SCC/IGA in air and water vapor environments as
well as in corrosive environments containing chloride solutions and/or salt water.

The best-known example of stress corrosion cracking is probably the season cracking of brass.
One cause of the cracking is the presence of ammonia or nitrogen bearing materials in conjunction
with moisture and oxygen. Carbon dioxide is also thought to contribute to the process [6, 7]. Alloys
containing 65% copper are extremely susceptible to SCC, with resistance to cracking increasing
progressively as the content of copper increases [6]. Brasses, including admiralty metal, are
susceptible to SCC if the zinc content is greater than 15%. Bronze (copper-tin alloys) and other
copper alloys are considerably more resistant to stress corrosion cracking than the copper-zinc
(brasses) alloys [6]. As such, bronzes and copper alloys except brass are not considered susceptible
to SCC/IGA for this oil and fuel oil tool.

In summary, although the oil and fuel oil environments covered by this tool may contain additives
which are conducive to causing stress corrosion cracking in many materials, the corrosion inhibitors,
emulsifying agents, and overall coating properties of lubricating oil are not likely to result in the
conditions necessary for SCC in oil systems. In addition, the industry search identified no
incidences of stress corrosion cracking in these systems. However, the environment in fuel oil
systems is generally not as clean or corrosion resistant as in lubricating oil systems, especially in
equipment likely to contain water contamination and stagnant conditions (storage tanks and heat
exchangers are examples of locations in which external contaminants and water may accumulate).
Therefore, SCC may occur in stainless steel, with temperatures above 140F, and in certain
aluminum and copper alloys in fuel oil systems in locations such as tank and heat exchanger bottoms
and piping low points where water and contaminants could collect.

3.2.3 Vibration

Material fatigue resulting from vibration has been observed in the nuclear industry and can result in
cracking initiation and growth. Vibration induced fatigue is fast acting and typically detected early
in a components service life and is corrected to prevent recurrence. Corrective actions usually
involve modifications to the plant such as the addition of supplemental restraints to a piping system,
the replacement of tubing with flexible hoses, or the isolation/elimination of the vibration source
when possible. Based upon these considerations, cracking due to vibration fatigue is not considered
an applicable aging effect for the period of extended operation of the plant.

3.2.4 Mechanical/Thermal Fatigue

Aging effects due to mechanical/thermal fatigue are covered separately in Appendix H.


The fracture toughness of wrought austenitic stainless steel and cast austenitic stainless steel is
typically higher than carbon and low-alloy steels. Aging mechanisms that may lead to reduction of
fracture toughness include thermal embrittlement, radiation embrittlement, and hydrogen
embrittlement. Hydrogen embrittlement is covered in Section 3.2.1 of this tool, which discusses
hydrogen damage. The susceptibility of the materials listed in Section 2.1 to reduction of fracture
toughness is discussed below.

3.3.1 Thermal Aging

Thermal aging, sometimes referred to as thermal embrittlement, is a time and temperature dependent
mechanism where microstructural changes lead to increased yield and tensile strength, decreased
ductility, and degradation of toughness. Cast austenitic stainless steels and precipitation-hardenable
stainless steels are the only materials currently known to be susceptible to thermal aging for PWR
conditions. Embrittlement of CASS is a concern for license renewal at temperatures of 482F or
more. The materials covered by this tool do not exceed 200
o
F; therefore, thermal aging is not a
concern for lubricating oil and fuel oil systems.


Radiation embrittlement can result in a decrease in fracture toughness of metals; however, it requires
neutron fluence values far exceeding 10
17
n/cm
2
. The components and systems covered by this tool
are sufficiently far away from the reactor vessel where fluence values are significantly lower than
10
17
n/cm
2
[8]. Therefore, radiation embrittlement is considered not applicable.

3.4 Distortion

Distortion may be caused by plastic deformation as a result of creep. In general, distortion is
addressed by the design codes and is not considered an applicable aging effect. Creep is not a
plausible aging mechanism since the high temperatures required for this mechanism to occur
(generally at temperatures >40% of the alloy melting point) are not observed in either PWR or
BWR systems [8].


Tables 4-1 and 4-2 contain a summary of the various aging mechanisms and effects considered
during the development of this tool. Also included are the necessary conditions for these aging
effects and the materials that are susceptible to these effects.


An operational history review was performed using NPRDS, its successor EPIX, and NRC generic
communications that apply to oil and fuel oil systems. Each is reported below.


The Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS) contains information on plant operating
experiences up through 1997. From 1997 through the present, this data is contained in the
Equipment Performance and Information Exchange (EPIX) system. The purpose of a review of this
material is to assure that failures of in-scope equipment due to aging is considered and also to assure
that overly conservative assessments of equipment aging are not made.

The oil and fuel oil tool covers numerous systems and materials. As a result, it would be extremely
time consuming to sort and review all NPRDS and EPIX entries that cover this entire spectrum of
failures. The search criteria included only diesel oil and diesel fuel system entries including the high
pressure core spray (HPCS) fuel oil and lube oil systems found in later BWR plants. There are
several concerns and/or precautions regarding the use of this data. The materials identified and the
failure causes are oftentimes incomplete or missing data and some interpretation is required. In
areas involving pressure boundary degradation in close proximity to vibrating equipment, the
probable root cause of vibration may not be identified. However, the informative nature of the data
outweighs these recognized limitations.

For the NPRDS data base query, the following search conditions were selected:

Selected Safety Classes are Safety-related Components, Non Safety-related Components,
and Other

Selected Failure Cause Categories are Age/Normal Usage, Unknown (included Code X
prior to 4/94), and Other (was included in Code K prior to 4/94)


Selected NSSSs are Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Westinghouse PWRs,
and General Electric BWRs

Selected Components are ACCUMU, FILTER, PIPE, PUMP, VALVE, and VESSEL



Excluded VALVE Failure Modes are Failed to Close, Failed to Open, Internal Leakage,
Fail to Operate Properly (Backfit Only), Fail to Operate as Required, Premature Opening,
and Fail to Remain Open

Selected Failure/Cause Descriptions are Foreign Material/Substance (include AJ before
4/94), Particulate Contamination, Normal Wear (included AH before 4/94), Welding
Process, Abnormal Stress (Mech) (included AQ before 4/94), Abnormal Wear (included
in AD before 4/94), Loose Parts (included AP before 4/94), Mechanical Damage

(included BK before 4/94), Aging/Cyclic Fatigue (Mech) (included BL before 4/94),
Dirty, Corrosion, Mech Binding/Sticking (included in BB before 4/94), Mechanical
Interference (include in BF before 4/94), Environmental Condition (code added 4/94),
and Other (code added 4/94)

Selected Systems are Diesel Fuel Oil-BW, Diesel Lube Oil-BW, Diesel Fuel Oil-CE,
Diesel Lube Oil-CE, Diesel Fuel Oil-W, Diesel Lube Oil-W, Diesel Fuel Oil-GE, Diesel
Lube Oil-GE, HPCS Fuel Oil-GE, and HPCS Lube Oil-GE

The purpose of the NPRDS and EPIX searches was to identify equipment failures resulting from the
effects of aging. Using the above search criteria, 478 entries were selected. As the EPIX search was
conducted for Revision 3 of these tools, the above NPRDS search conditions were matched as close
as possible for the EPIX queries. Although the EPIX search conditions are not an exact match for
the NPRDS conditions, a conservative approach was taken when determining the appropriate search
conditions. These records were reviewed and those involving consumables such as failed/worn
gaskets, packing material failures, and other diaphragm, seal, or sealant failures were excluded from
further consideration. Other failures relating to design problems, failures resulting from faulty
maintenance, clogged filters, and other various failures not related to equipment aging were also
excluded.

Most of the selected entries were excluded. Of the 351 items identified, 285 involved failures of
gasket, seal, sealant, diaphragm, O ring, and other consumable items. The next largest category of
failures involved active components.

The failure of a component to perform its active functions accounted for 117 entries. This category
consisted of pump and valve failures associated with their active functions. Also included in this
category were instances of isolation and relief valve internal leakage and failure to perform an active
relief or isolation function. These types of failures impact the component active functions and are
covered adequately by Maintenance Rule programs. These types of failures are, therefore, not
addressed by these Mechanical Tools.

An additional 24 entries resulted from the failure of filters to perform their required functions. This
included both clogged and partially blocked filters and strainers. High differential pressures were
cited as the cause of many filter/screen failures. In all cases the filter and/or strainer was cleaned or
replaced and the system returned to operable status.

Electrical failures accounted for 9 entries. These failures included electrical equipment and
instruments such as pump motors, coils, thermostats, and bearing temperature elements.

There were only 44 entries that represented equipment failures resulting from the effects of aging.
Table 3-1 identifies the number of records attributed to the various aging mechanisms and includes a
percentage of the total for each category.


Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary

FAILURE CAUSE
NO. OF
ENTRIES
% OF
TOTAL
Leaking hoses/fittings/tubing 22 50
Cracking 10 23
Threaded Connections 5 11
Loose bolts/plugs 7 16

Most of the failures attributed to aging did not specifically identify the cause of failure. In the PWR
data search, the failures of hoses, fittings, and tubing, for the most part, were simply listed as
leakage of the various components with no cause identified. It is likely that at least some of the
other failures were also attributable to vibration. Many of the failures occurred in equipment either
directly connected to pumps (fittings/hoses/tubing attached to pumps) or in the vicinity of the
vibrating equipment (location identified as pump discharge relief valve, pump downstream fitting,
pump inlet connection). The BWR search, however, did attribute a number of failures specifically to
vibration. Additional failures in the BWR data may also be attributable to vibration for the same
reasons as indicated above for the PWR data.

Cracking of welded joints accounted for ten failures. Most of the cracked welded joints involved
fittings such as nipples, couplings, and flanges. One failure of a check valve body attributed to
cracking was included in this grouping. As discussed above for the hose/fittings/tubing failures,
some of these cracking failures may be the result of vibration; however, that conclusion cannot be
determined from the data.

There were five failures of threaded attachments. For a majority of the cases, it was not clear
whether the failures were due to corrosion of the threads, wear due to repeated maintenance of the
component, or vibrational wear. Some failures may simply be a result of aging of the thread sealant,
which is considered to be a consumable.

Seven failures were classified as loose bolts or plugs. In most cases, the cause of these failures was
not apparent from the available NPRDS data.

3.6.1.1 Summary of NPRDS / EPIX Search

The NPRDS / EPIX review verifies that corrosion or cracking failures of lubricating oil components
are infrequent. This review also reflects the extremely low incidence of failure of components
exposed to lubricating oil and fuel oil; the search did not identify any incidents of corrosion in these
systems. Of the ten incidences of cracking, only one could be directly attributed to corrosion or
other pressure boundary material loss aging effects (SCC). It is likely that a number are attributable
to vibration.


Although not specifically identified as vibration caused failures, the NPRDS / EPIX data does
suggest that a significant number of failures in the vicinity of rotating equipment were caused by
vibration. Several failures of fittings, hoses, flanges, worn threaded connections, and loose bolts
specifically identified vibration as the suspected cause of failure. Some of the failures of gaskets
and sealant, although included in a category for consumable items and not considered an aging
concern, also could be considered the result of vibration. In some instances, failures were co-
incident with high vibration resulting from pump and/or coupling failures.

3.6.1.2 Observations and Limitations in Using the NPRDS / EPIX Search Results

The following observations and limitations were noted during the review of the NPRDS / EPIX
entries.

1. The exact cause of failure is often not clear because of the vagueness of the information.

2. Because of the relatively low cost of replacement of items in the oil/fuel oil systems, the cause
of failure is often not evaluated and the items are replaced with the same part with identical or
similar design and materials.

3. Many pressure boundary failures as a result of aging of consumables such as O-rings, gaskets,
sealant, and diaphragms, were described. Unlike the failure of these types of components in
other systems (e.g., air systems), the failures in the diesel lube oil and diesel fuel systems
resulted, in many instances, in the loss of system functions.

4. Because of the high safety significance of diesel generators and the fire hazard resulting from
oil or fuel spills, most of these failures resulted in degraded system status even though many of
the pressure boundary failures may not have been sufficiently severe to affect the system
functions.

5. The screening criteria included only emergency diesel lube and fuel oil systems even though
there are numerous other system and components that contain lube oil (e.g., DHR/RHR pumps,
high and low pressure injection and spray pumps, service/raw water pumps). The amount of
time necessary to review all potential lube oil component failures required that the scope of the
search be limited.

3.6.2 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence

A search was made of generic NRC correspondence that might relate to aging degradation in oil and
fuel mechanical boundary components. Oil and fuel oil systems include the diesel generator fuel and
various hydraulic and lube oil systems servicing plant components including main feedwater and
auxiliary feedwater. The NRC generic communications include Circulars, Bulletins, Information
Notices, and Generic Letters. Of these, 10 were considered to be related, either directly or indirectly,
to the oil or fuel oil system components. Two were Circulars, 7 were Information Notices, and 1 was
a Generic Letter. These entries are discussed briefly below.


Circulars
CR 77-15: Degradation of Fuel Oil Flow to the Emergency Diesel Generator
The purpose of this circular is to inform licensees about degradation of fuel oil flow to the day tank
for the emergency diesel generator. Although the fuel oil transfer pump capacity is 13.8 gpm for
each of the two redundant pumps, flow to the day tank for the number one diesel generator was only
3 gpm. At full load, engine consumption is 4.5 gpm. Investigation of this occurrence revealed a
clogged strainer in a float operated shutoff valve on the day tank inlet. The strainer is an integral part
of the float valve assembly and is not shown on the as-built system drawings. Licensees were
recommended to perform field verification of the drawing against the as-built system and revise
surveillance test procedures as necessary. The circular also provided information relating to the
maintenance of fuel oil. The presence of zinc, such as from galvanizing, has a tendency to form
soluble soaps in the fuel oil which are deposited on the diesel engines injection nozzles. A buildup
of this deposit will eventually degrade the engines performance. The presence of copper promotes
the formation of gums which degrade the stored fuel oil and tend to clog filters. The presence of
water in the fuel oil promotes the growth of fungi or slime that also degrades the fuel and has the
potential for clogging filters.

CR 80-11: Emergency Diesel Generator Lube Oil Cooler Failures
Diesel generator lube oil cooler failures were reported. The DGs were manufactured by EMD of
General Motors. The failures were caused by severe corrosion of the solder, which sealed the tubes to
the tube sheets. These failures occurred in the raw water side of the coolers. The corrosion inhibitor
in use was Calgon CS, a borated-nitrite type inhibitor. The manufacturer of this type of inhibitor has
recommended the use of hard solder in CS treated systems. EMD does not recommend the use of
Calgon CS since the puddle solder used in EMD radiators and oil coolers is a soft solder of lead-tin
composition.

Information Notices
IN 79-23: Emergency Diesel Generator Lube Oil Coolers
Water intrusion in the lube oil system resulted in trips of both diesel generator units during their
surveillance tests. The water intrusion was caused by tube sheet failure in the lube oil coolers. The
failures were cracks around the outer periphery of the tube sheets. Coolers were replaced; however,
the failure mechanism has not been determined.

IN 85-08: Industry Experience On Certain Materials Used In Safety-Related Equipment
This information notice was issued to provide licensees and construction permit holders with
information pertaining to the behavior of certain materials used in safety-related equipment. Three
of the materials were elastomers and one related to a coating applied to the diesel oil storage tank.
During final inspection of the diesel oil storage tanks at Limerick Generating Station, the epoxy
phenolic coating on portions of the interior surface of three of the four Unit 1 tanks was observed to
have extensive peeling and flaking. The specification for Limerick Station required that the entire
interior surface of the tanks be coated with an inorganic zinc primer to a thickness of between 2.0
mils and 4.0 mils. On top of the zinc primer, an epoxy phenolic coating was applied to a minimum
of 12 mils and a maximum of 18 mils dry film thickness. Philadelphia Electric Company stated that
there are two factors that may have contributed to the coating failure: (1) chemical incompatibility
between the zinc primer and the epoxy coating, and (2) improper curing of the zinc primer.
Subsequent investigation revealed that the zinc in the primer coat may react adversely with diesel

fuel when exposed over a long period of time. Products of this reaction are often soluble when the
fuel is at room temperature, but may degrade into insoluble gums as the fuel passes through the hot
injectors and intake manifolds of a diesel engine, and thus may result in degraded performance as
the engine is operated over a period of time. The Philadelphia Electric Company proposed
corrective actions to provide sufficient protection against the deficiencies described above and also
against any internal corrosion of the tanks as a result of internal condensation. The interior surface
of the tanks will be sandblasted to white metal and recoated with a substitute epoxy phenolic coating
applied directly to the white metal.

IN 86-73: Recent Emergency Diesel Generator Problems
This notice is to alert addressees to vibration-induced fuel line wear and of a deficiency in the design
of the field flash circuitry on nuclear plant emergency diesel generators. While conducting diesel
generator testing in early May 1986 at Nine Mile Point Unit 2, it was discovered that diesel fuel
lines had experienced extensive wear and fuel leaks in the area of the clamps that mount the fuel
lines to the diesel engine. Fuel line damage was caused by vibration from the diesel engine and fuel
system pulsation induced by rapid, repeated cycling of a fuel system relief valve. This valve relieves
from the low pressure fuel system via a cooler to the fuel day tank to control low pressure fuel
system pressure. The manufacturer proposes to correct the problem by inserting plastic sleeves
between the fuel line and its hold down clamps and installing a dashpot on the relief valve to
dampen its operation.

IN 89-07: Failures of Small Diameter Tubing in Control Air, Fuel, Oil, and Lube Oil Systems
Render Emergency Diesels Inoperable
This information notice indicates that small diameter tubing installed on EDGs or other components
is susceptible to vibration-induced failures which could render the component inoperable. The
vibration-induced failures may appear as cracking or breaks as well as holes and wall thinning
caused by rubbing of components. These failures are not limited to specific manufacturers, systems,
or materials. The common underlying cause of the failures is the inadequate design or installation of
supports for the small diameter tubing in a vibrating environment.

IN 91-46: Degradation of Emergency Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Delivery Systems
This information notice alerts the utilities about problems encountered with the emergency diesel
generator fuel oil delivery systems, ranging from a delivery system maintenance issue (i.e.,
inappropriate painting clogging the injection nozzles) to standards and test specification for fuel oil
quality and degradation/deterioration over time. This information notice does not address any aging
related degradation issues; however, the resultant conditions can cause aging effects and inability of
the systems to perform their intended functions.

IN 93-48: Failure of Turbine-Driven Main Feedwater Pump to Trip Because of Contaminated Oil
This information notice alerts the utilities about potential problems resulting from suspended particles in
the control oil in the trip system for turbine-driven main feedwater pumps. Suspended particles in the
oil created a flow blockage in the control oil pump valves. This prevents proper drainage of the trip
system. Most of the accumulated particles were small, but some were up to 6 mm (1/4 in.) long. The
condition resulted in accumulation of suspended particles in the low flow areas of control oil ports over
a period of time. The maintenance program should include flush of possible suspended particle buildup

areas. This Information Notice addresses a concern that affects the active function of the oil hydraulic
system and equipment that is probably outside the scope of license renewal at most plants.

IN 94-58: Reactor Coolant Pump Lube Oil Fire
This information notice was issued to alert the licensees of a problem that may exist with the oil
collection system for the lube oil system components of reactor coolant pumps. The oil collection
system must be designed in such a way that it can properly catch and route to a safe location the oil
leakage from the RC pump lube oil system. The piping and components around the RC pumps are
normally above the lube oil ignition point. Therefore, a fire could start if the lube oil came in contact
with a hot component. In one of the cases cited in this information notice a PVC pipe carrying oil from
the lube pump to the RC motor cracked and spilled oil on a hot pipe, causing an oil fire in containment.
PVC tube was used to electrically isolate the RC motor from the lube oil pump.

IE Bulletins
No IE Bulletins were identified that relate to the oil and fuel oil systems.

Generic Letters
GL 83-26: Clarification of Surveillance Requirements for Diesel Fuel Impurity Level Tests
This generic letter provides clarification for the surveillance requirements of diesel fuel impurity levels.
Fuel impurity levels may affect corrosion. Specifically, programs to monitor purity levels may be part of
a license renewal credited program (similar to a chemistry program).

3.6.3 Summary of Generic Correspondence

A majority of the significant generic correspondence issued was concerned with either water
intrusion or lack of adequate oil and fuel oil purity control. Water intrusion into oil or fuel oil
systems can result in a corrosive environment and is specifically addressed in the tool logic.
IN 79-23 and CR 80-11 deal with specific failures of a certain type of lube oil cooler soldered tube
to tubesheet connection in the presence of Calgon CS corrosion inhibitor. This failure is manifested
on the treated water side of the lube oil coolers and is addressed in the Heat Exchanger tool
(Appendix G).

Contaminants do not typically affect the license renewal intended functions (i.e., pressure boundary
structural integrity). However, in combination with moisture intrusion, they can accelerate
corrosion of the system materials. Since there are many sources of moisture in these systems, it is
assumed that if moisture intrusion has occurred, contamination is also present. As indicated in IN
93-48, particle contamination can also result in the failure of certain trip functions in oil control
systems. These trip functions are part of active functions that are outside the scope of this tool.

IN 85-08 discusses peeling and flaking of epoxy phenolic coatings on the lower portion of diesel
fuel oil storage tanks. In addition to the loss of corrosion protection of the tank material, this
coating could potentially result in impeded fuel oil flow. Although epoxy phenolic coatings are not
specifically discussed in this tool logic, tank liner/coating integrity verification for all coatings/liners
is included.

The diesel generators are very large engines, which vibrate when operating. Connected to these
large vibrating machines are numerous small bore pipes and instruments lines. Many of these
attached pipes include diesel fuel oil and lubricating oil lines. In addition, the fuel oil and lube oil
pumps in the supply systems also vibrate when operating. IN 86-73 and IN 89-07 address specific
failures of these attached lines. Some cracking may be a result of inadequate support design for
small bore piping or the cyclic nature of the operation of diesel generators and their support systems.
Logic is included in this tool to address vibration concerns.

IN 94-58 addresses inadequate design considerations in PWR reactor coolant pump oil collection
systems and is not an aging issue.


4. FLOW DIAGRAM/ SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT

4.1 Assumptions

The assumptions used to develop the evaluation flow chart (and summary tables) are provided
below.

1. The number of additives and by-products found in oil and fuel oil products make it difficult to
consider all possible naturally occurring or manufacturer added contaminants. The effect of
these additives on various forms of corrosion such as SSC, pitting, and crevice corrosion may
not be well known. Therefore, contaminants that can cause corrosion are assumed to be present.
These contaminants include sulfates, halides, and chlorides.

2. Consumable items such as gaskets, O-rings, seals, and sealing compounds are not subject to
aging management review (See section 2.2 of the Implementation Guideline).

3. Crevice corrosion requires some type of crevice (two surfaces approaching each other within a
few thousandths of an inch or less). It is unreasonable to expect an evaluator to respond to a

that are difficult to predict. It would be unreasonable to expect an evaluator to establish the
presence of stresses resulting from the manufacturing process or post installation welding for
every component under consideration. In these instances, the logic will conservatively assume
that the stress exists.

5. Macroorganisms (e.g., barnacles, mussels, clams, and algae) are assumed not to be present to
any significant degree for the purposes of this tool. Macroorganisms are only present in raw
water systems.

6. Microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) can only propagate at low temperatures (typically
assumed to be at or below 200F). It is assumed that, for the fuel oil applications included in
this tool, the low temperatures of the fluids are such that they support the propagation of MIC.

7. Hydrogen damage is typically only a concern in the petroleum industry during the refining
process [7]. A review of available industry data and AMRs [9, 12, 13] indicates that hydrogen
damage is only a concern for fuel oil storage tanks where cathodic protection is used and the
voltage is improperly set [12].

8. If this tool is used to evaluate the reactor coolant pump (RCP) oil collection system at PWRs, it
should be noted that at times the oil collection system can be subjected to
condensation/moisture, leaking oil, and the containment atmosphere. No single tool is likely to
contain all the logic to evaluate these particular components. Appropriate raw water, treated
water, gas, or other tools should be applied to assure that all aging mechanisms are evaluated.


9. Failure of Epoxy Phenolic coatings on fuel oil storage tanks due to flaking and peeling can
result in corrosion and/or plugging of fuel lines. Where the logic applies a determination as to
whether the liner/coating integrity is verified, it is assumed that this includes consideration of
this type of coating.

4.2 General

for systems and components that are required to undergo an aging management review in
compliance with the license renewal rule. Implementation of these tools at the various sites will
result in the identification of plant equipment and aging effects that must be managed, or
justification that management of aging effects is not required, during the renewal period.
Demonstration of the adequacy of aging management programs is outside the scope of this tool.

These tools will identify potential aging effects and also direct the user to areas in the system where
these effects might preferentially occur. The discussions in Section 3 identified aging mechanisms
and their associated aging effects, which can occur in the oil and fuel oil system equipment
addressed by these tools. The user is guided through logic to determine whether these effects are
significant based on specific system or component materials, environment, and/or operating
conditions. These tools address the effects of aging on materials that are in oil or fuel oil
environments. They are organized such that those using the tools do not require detailed knowledge
of aging mechanisms or their effects. The logic does, however, require that the user be familiar with
the materials of construction, applicable environments, and system operating conditions.

The evaluation logic groups aging effects such as loss of material and cracking to efficiently resolve
the disposition of equipment for a given material. Implementation of the tools, in effect, documents
the identification of applicable aging mechanisms and the resultant aging effects. The results not
only identify the effects which must be managed but, given the screening criteria, can be a valuable
input when determining how and where to implement aging management programs, which are not in
the scope of this tool.

4.3 Tool Descriptions

Tables 4-1 and 4-2 (added in Revision 3) identify applicable aging effects, and corresponding
mechanisms, that may require programmatic oversight (management) for the period of extended
operation, as well as the applicability criteria for the occurrence and propagation of the mechanisms.
These tables summarize the information depicted on the corresponding logic diagrams (Figure 1
Figure 2) and are organized alphabetically by material and then by aging mechanism. The potential
aging effects, together with the detailed mechanism discussions in Section 3.0 and assumptions in
Section 4.1 of this appendix, provide the basis for the development of the lubricating oil and fuel oil
tools described below. The materials and environments covered by these tools are described in
Section 2.0.


As discussed in Section 3.2.3, the chosen approach to address the loss of pressure boundary integrity
resulting from vibration is to take the position that vibration induced failures typically occur early in
plant life and are a design/installation/maintenance issue rather than an aging effect.

4.3.1 Lubricating Oil

Section 3 of this tool discusses the various aging mechanisms and it is concluded that MIC and SCC
are not significant aging mechanisms in lubricating oil systems. Based on Section 3, the referenced
material, and the industry failure data search and generic communications review, the other
significant aging effects are not expected to occur in lubricating oil systems unless external
contamination of the lubricating oil has occurred. The remainder of the lubricating oil tool logic,
therefore, asks whether the potential for water contamination exists. Even if water contamination
occurs, significant aging effects would only be expected where the water contamination can settle or
pool to result in a potential corrosive environment. Oil reservoirs and the bottoms of heat
exchangers are examples of areas where water can settle. If the likelihood of water contamination
and subsequent settling does not exist for equipment, aging effects are not likely to occur.

The remainder of the logic focuses, material by material, on the aging effects that may occur in
locations subject to water contamination and subsequent settling or pooling of the water. General
corrosion of carbon and low-alloy steels and cast iron (as discussed in Section 3.1.1 of this tool) is
likely in a pooled water environment. Pitting and/or crevice corrosion is also a potential aging effect
in these locations and is applicable to all susceptible materials covered by this tool logic.

Although the design of most equipment and components precludes galvanic corrosion, wherever
dissimilar materials are in contact, the potential for corrosion does exist. In a corrosive
environment, contact, or close proximity of materials that are distant in the galvanic series, can
result in a loss of material of the more anodic material. This is usually a concern where carbon, low-
alloy steel, or cast iron is in contact with stainless steel. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are anodic
to any other metal in electrolytic contact; whereas copper and copper alloys are anodic when in
electrolytic contact with stainless steels but cathodic when in contact with aluminum, carbon and
low allow steel, or cast iron. Heat exchangers are particularly susceptible because of the various
materials of construction and environments. The tool logic requires some knowledge of the various
materials of construction for the evaluation of the likelihood of galvanic corrosion. Although
sacrificial anodes, coatings, and separation devices can be used to minimize the likelihood for
galvanic corrosion, the tool does not take credit for any programmatic systems in its determination
of applicable aging effect for a given environment.

The logic also addresses selective leaching. Only gray cast iron and uninhibited copper alloys with
high zinc and aluminum contents in the presence of pooled water are affected.

4.3.2 Fuel Oil

Microorganisms can live in fuel oil with only minute amounts of water and, therefore, methods to
control microorganisms must be implemented. There are various methods to control MIC, the
addition of a biocide being one example [6]. However, the tool does not take credit for any
programmatic systems in its determination of applicable aging effects for a given environment.

Cathodic protection has been known to result in hydrogen damage to carbon and low-alloy steel
(conservatively also applied to cast iron) when the voltage has been improperly set [12]. No specific
acceptance criteria can be listed since each system and application is unique. The tool logic
addresses the likelihood of hydrogen damage in situations where cathodic protection is used.

The top tier of the logic concentrates on the conditions that are necessary in fuel oil systems for a
corrosive environment. Since the corrosion mechanisms require an electrolytic medium, it is
assumed that water contamination can occur in the fuel oil systems. When water contamination is
present, significant corrosion is only expected where the water can settle or pool. When water
contamination does occur, it tends to collect in stagnant or low flow portions of the system (e.g.,
tanks and reservoirs). It can settle in low flow areas such as heat exchangers where the oil and water
separate, with the water gradually moving to the lower areas. The low flow typically seen in these
systems may not be sufficient to flush the pooled water rendering a corrosive environment

This logic tier addresses many different materials and focuses on the various corrosion mechanisms
that may occur for those materials affected by these mechanisms.

In a wetted environment, with oxygen >100 ppb and Temperature >140F, all stainless steels
within the scope of this tool are considered to be susceptible to stress corrosion cracking (SCC).
Stainless steels are also susceptible to crevice and pitting corrosion in wetted environments
regardless of temperature and O
2
content.

Galvanic corrosion is only a concern where materials are in contact in the presence of an electrolyte
(e.g., pooled water) and are distant from each other in the galvanic series. Only the more anodic
material is affected (e.g., carbon steel and copper alloys are affected when in contact with stainless
steel). The severity of the resultant loss of material is determined by the surface area of material in
contact and the nature of the corrosive environment.

Pure aluminum is not susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking. However, aluminum alloys
containing more than 12% zinc or more than 6% magnesium are susceptible. Of the copper alloys
covered by this tool, only those brasses containing greater than 15% zinc (including admiralty and
Muntz) and aluminum bronzes with greater than 8% aluminum are susceptible to SCC in wetted
locations with O
2
>100 ppb. Pitting and/or crevice corrosion is also a concern for all copper alloy
materials covered by this tool.

Selective leaching in a wetted environment can occur, particularly when oxygen, carbon dioxide, or
chlorides are present. The logic tree addresses this issue identifying uninhibited copper alloys with
high zinc and aluminum contents and gray cast iron as the only materials susceptible to this loss of
material effect.

In a wetted environment, general corrosion of carbon and low-alloy steel as well as cast iron is a
concern, as is crevice and/or pitting corrosion of these materials.


4.4 GALL Comparison

mechanical components. GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for oil
environments addressed by this tool. GALL Chapter IV (Reactor Vessel, Internals, and Reactor
Coolant System) is focused on Class 1 components that are not addressed by this tool and does not
include oil environments. The identification and evaluation of aging management programs (AMPs)
is outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described in

While component identification is also outside the scope of this tool, the materials for the pertinent
items in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the materials addressed by this tool,
which are described in Section 2.1. Carbon or low-alloy steel is referred to as steel in the GALL
items for environments addressed by this tool. Cast iron is included with steel in the GALL items
for environments addressed by this tool. Copper and copper alloys are referred to as copper alloy
and aluminum and aluminum alloys are referred to as aluminum in the GALL items for
environments addressed by this tool. The GALL items for environments addressed by this tool also
include glass and stainless steel.

The following GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII environments (fuel oil and lubricating oil) are
bounded by the environments addressed in these oil and fuel oil tools, which are described in
Section 2.2.

The GALL items addressing glass in lubricating oil (V.F-7, VII.J -10, and VIII.I-6) and fuel oil
(VII.J -9) concur with the conclusions of Section 2.1.6 of this tool with respect to degradation of
glass exposed to oil not being a concern.

Additionally, the aging mechanisms identified in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII are grouped
without clear indication as to the basis for mechanisms (e.g., MIC and/or fouling) that are indicated
as applicable to certain components but not to others. The aging effect cited in GALL Chapters V,
VII, and VIII for metals in the lubricating oil and fuel oil environments includes loss of material,
with the following groupings of mechanisms depending on material susceptibility:

General, pitting, and crevice corrosion
General, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and fouling
Pitting, and crevice corrosion
Pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion

Consistent with the discussions in Section 3.0 of this tool, the aging effect identified in the GALL as
requiring management (loss of material) for metals in fuel oil and lubricating oil environments is
associated with water pooling in the oil. The GALL does not identify cracking due to SCC/IGA or
loss of material due to galvanic corrosion or selective leaching in lubricating oil or fuel oil

environments, whereas they are evaluated in this tool, in Sections 3.2.2, 3.1.2, and 3.1.8,
respectively. The GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII items that identify aging effects for external
surfaces, closure bolting, and heat exchangers are addressed separately in Appendix E, Appendix F,
and Appendix G, respectively. Likewise, GALL items for fatigue are evaluated separately in

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Lubricating Oil
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Presence of water contamination
and
2. Potential for water pooling / separation

items that address aluminum (or aluminum
alloys) in lubrication oil, only for fuel oil (See
Table 4-2).
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
and

items that cite galvanic corrosion in lubricating
oil, but cite galvanic corrosion for copper alloy
only in treated water (or closed cooling water)
environments.
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron
Loss of Material /
General
Corrosion
and
V.A-25,
V.D1-28,
V.D2-30

VII.C1-17,
VII.C2-13,
VII.E1-19,
VII.E4-16,
VII.F1-19,
VII.F2-17,
VII.F3-19,
VII.F4-15,
VII.G-22,
VII.G-26,
Yes
Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.1

Specified GALL items list general, pitting and
crevice corrosion of steel exposed to lubricating
oil. GALL items for steel include both carbon
steel, low-alloy steel, and cast iron.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
Tool vs
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.

VII.G-27,
VII.H2-20

VIII.A-14,
VIII.D1-6,
VIII.D2-5,
VIII.E-32,
VIII.G-35

Carbon Steel
and Low-Alloy
Steel and Cast
Iron (Contd)
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
and
None No Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.2

oil, only in treated water environments.
Cast Iron and
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
and
and
3. Material is gray cast iron or Brass/bronze
>15% Zn or
Aluminum bronze >8% Al
and
4. Copper alloy is uninhibited

such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic and antimony
(e.g., 1% tin to brass) effectively inhibit
dezincification. Aluminum bronzes are
inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As.
None No Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 3.1.8
Assumption 4.1.1

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not list
selective leaching as an applicable aging effect
in lubricating oil environments.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
Tool vs
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
and
3. Material is Brass/Bronze >15% Zn or
Aluminum Bronze >8% Al
V.A-21,
V.D1-18,
V.D2-22

VII.C1-8,
VII.C2-5,
VII.E1-12,
VII.E4-6,
VII.G-11,
VII.H2-10

VIII.A-3,
VIII.D1-2,
VIII.D2-2,
VIII.E-17,
VIII.G-19
Yes Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

Specified GALL items list pitting and crevice
corrosion as applicable aging mechanisms for
copper alloy in lubricating oil, but do not include
applicability criteria regarding water pooling or
zinc/aluminum content.

GALL items do not distinguish between copper
and copper alloys, or between copper alloys with
>15% Zn or >8% Al and copper alloy, with
respect to crevice and pitting corrosion.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
and

oil, only in treated water environments.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
Tool vs
Discussion
GALL
(GALL)
Match
Item No.
Stainless Steel Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
V.D1-24

VII.C1-14,
VII.C2-12,
VII.E1-15,
VII.E4-12,
VII.G-18,
VII.H2-17

VIII.A-9,
VIII.D1-3,
VIII.D2-3,
VIII.E-26,
VIII.G-29
No Sections 2.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

Specified GALL items list pitting, crevice, and
microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) as
applicable aging mechanisms for stainless steel in
lubricating oil. With respect to crevice and
pitting corrosion the GALL and this tool are
consistent.

However, MIC is not identified in GALL as an
aging mechanism requiring management for
other materials in lubricating oil. Also, MIC is
not cited as an aging mechanism requiring
management for stainless steel in lubricating oil
for GALL item V.D1-24. The GALL does not
include the reason/basis that MIC requires
management in lubricating oil environments for
stainless steel in certain systems, but does not for
stainless steel in other systems or for other
materials, regardless of the system.

Furthermore, as described in Section 3.1.6, the
likelihood of MIC causing extensive damage in
lube oil systems is minimal and loss of material
due to MIC is not an applicable aging effect.

Table 4-2 Aging Effects Summary - Fuel Oil
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Potential for water pooling / separation VII.H1-1,
VII.H2-7
Yes Sections 2.1.3, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

Specified GALL items cite pitting, crevice, and
microbiologically influenced corrosion as
applicable aging mechanisms for aluminum in
fuel oil.
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not identify
galvanic corrosion as an applicable aging
mechanism in fuel oil.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. Always VII.H1-1,
VII.H2-7

applicable aging mechanisms for aluminum in
fuel oil.
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
and
2. Material is aluminum alloy >12% Zn or
>6% Mg

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not address
SCC/IGA as an applicable aging effect in oil
environments.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Potential for water pooling / separation Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

Loss of Material /
General
Corrosion
VII.G-21
VII.H1-10,
VII.H2-24
Yes
Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.1

Specified GALL items cite general, pitting, and
crevice corrosion of steel. Items VII.H1-10 and
VII.H2-24 also list MIC and fouling as applicable
aging mechanisms (see below).
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
None No Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.2

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII include items
for galvanic corrosion in treated water only, and
do not identify it as an aging mechanism
requiring management in fuel oil.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy Steel
and Cast Iron
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. Always VII.H1-10,
VII.H2-24
No Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.1.6

GALL items VII.H1-10 and VII.H2-24 cite MIC
and fouling as aging mechanisms that require
management in fuel oil, along with general,
crevice, and pitting corrosion.

However, GALL item VII.G-19 (see
crevice/pitting discussion above) does not list
microbiologically influenced corrosion or fouling
as an aging mechanism that requires management
in fuel oil, which implies that MIC and fouling
may occur in certain systems but not in others.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Carbon and
Low-Alloy Steel
and Cast Iron
(Contd)
Cracking /
Hydrogen
Damage
(Embrittlement)
1. Material is carbon or low-alloy steel (for
fuel oil storage tanks).
and
2. Impressed current cathodic protection
system is utilized
and
3. Plant-specific operating experience shows
prolonged or recurring use at improper
voltage settings.

Note: Hydrogen embrittlement may also be
evidenced by a reduction of fracture
toughness.
None No Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 3.2.1
Assumptions 4.1.7

GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII do not identify
cracking or reduction of fracture toughness for
metals or in fuel oil environments.
Cast Iron and
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
and
2. Material is gray cast iron or
Brass/bronze >15% Zn or
Aluminum bronze > 8% Al
and
3. Copper alloy is not inhibited

such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic and antimony
(e.g., 1% tin to brass) effectively inhibit
dezincification. Aluminum bronzes are
inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As.
None No Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 3.1.8
Assumption 4.1.1

items for selective leaching in oil environments.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
2. Material is Brass/Bronze > 15% Zn or
Aluminum Bronze > 8% Al
VII.G-10,
VII.H1-3,
VII.H2-9
No Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.3, 3.1.4

applicable aging mechanisms for copper alloys in
fuel oil. However, these GALL items do not
distinguish between copper alloy and copper
alloy with > 15% Zn or > 8% Al.
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and

galvanic corrosion as an aging mechanism
requiring management in fuel oil.
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. Always VII.G-10,
VII.H1-3,
VII.H2-9

See above discussion for crevice and/or pitting
corrosion.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
and
3. O
2
> 100 ppb
and
4. Material is Brass > 15% Zn or
Aluminum bronze > 8% Al

items for cracking due to SCC/IGA as an aging
effect that requires management in oil
environments.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
1. Potential for water pooling / separation Sections 2.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Loss of Material /
MIC
1. Always
VII.G-17,
VII.H1-6,
VII.H2-16
Yes
Sections 2.1.1, 3.1.6

Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to
pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced
corrosion as aging effects that require
management for stainless steel in fuel oil.
Stainless Steel
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
and
2. O
2
> 100 ppb
and

items that identify cracking due to SCC/IGA as
aging effects that require management in oil
environments.

Figure 1 Lubricating Oil Tool

Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Lube Oil
Environment?
Is there presence
of water
contamination?
Is component in contact with a more cathodic
Loss of material due to galvanic corrosion
may be a concern.
not a concern.
No aging effects
Stainless
Steel?
Temperature
> 140F?
not a concern.
Is location conducive
to water pooling?
Carbon Steel or Low Alloy
Steel or Cast Iron?
Loss of material due to crevice,
pitting corrosion is a concern.
Brass/Bronze w/ > 15% Zn
or Alum. Bronze w/ > 8% Al?
Copper alloy is uninhibited (e.g., no
amounts of Tin, Arsenic, etc.)?
Loss of material due to general,
crevice, pitting corrosion, and
selective leaching is not a concern.
Y
Y Y
Gray cast
iron?
Loss of material due to general, crevice,
and pitting corrosion is a concern.
Loss of material due to selective leaching
is not a concern.
Aluminum or
aluminum
alloy?
Y

Figure 2 Fuel Oil Tool
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N N
Y
Y
N
Y Y Y Y
Y
Fuel Oil
Environment?
Is location conducive
to water pooling /
separation?
Stainless Steel?
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
Is component in contact with a more cathodic
may be a concern.
not a concern.
Temperature
> 140F?
not a concern.
Brass w/ > 15% Zn
pitting corrosion, selective leaching
and cracking due to SCC are not a
concern.
Brass w/ > 15% Zn or Alum.
Bronze w/ > 8% Al?
general, crevice, pitting
corrosion and cracking due to
SCC are not a concern.
Y
Is O
2
>
100 ppb?
a concern.
not a concern.
Copper Alloy is uninhibited (e.g.,
no amounts of Tin, Arsenic, etc.)?
Loss of material due to general, crevice,
and pitting corrosion is a concern.
Carbon or
Low Alloy
Steel or
Cast Iron?
Gray cast iron?
is a concern.
Is an impressed
current cathodic
protection
system utilized?
Carbon or Low Alloy
Steel, Fuel Oil Storage
Tank?
Cracking (or reduction of fracture toughness) due to hydrogen embrittlement may be a concern
(if plant-specific operating experience shows prolonged or recurring instances of improper
voltage settings).
Hydrogen
embrittlement is
not a concern.
Y
N
Aluminum Alloy w/ >
12% Zn or > 6%Mg?
Cracking due to SCC is a
concern.
not a concern.
Aluminum or
Aluminum Alloy?
Y

5. REFERENCES

1. Properties and Selection: Iron, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, Metals Handbook, Tenth
Edition, Volume 1, American Society for Metals International, Materials Park, OH, 1990.

2. Welding, Brazing, and Soldering, Metals Handbook, Volume 6, American Society for Metals
International, Materials Park, OH, 1993.

3. Casting, Metals Handbook, Volume 15, Ninth Edition, American Society for Metals
International, Materials Park, OH, 1988.

Lynchburg, VA, J une 1996.

Condenser Water Boxes at Crystal River - 3, Proceedings of the Third International Symposium
on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Reactors, American Nuclear
Society, La Grange Park, IL, 1987, p. 647.

6. H. H. Uhlig, Corrosion Handbook, J ohn Wiley & Sons, May, 1948.

7. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1986.

Mechanisms, EPRI NP-5461, Project 2643-5 Interim Report, September 1987.

Plants-Heat Exchangers, Contractor Report No. SAND93-7070; UC-523, J une 1994.

10. W. H. Ailor, Atmospheric Corrosion, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986.

11. D. J . DePaul, ed., Corrosion and Wear Handbook for Water Cooled Reactors, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1957.

Plants-Tanks and Pools, Contractor Report No. SAND96-0343; UC-523, 1996.

Plants-Pumps, Contractor Report No. SAND93-7045; UC-523, 1994.

Power Plant Operating Licenses, Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1009, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, D.C., December 1990.

15. R. H. J ones, Stress Corrosion Cracking, American Society of Metals, Materials Park, OH, 1992.

York, 1977.

17. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, American Society for Metals (ASM)
International, Materials Park, OH, Copyright 1987.

1002950 J uly 2003.

19. Roff, W. J ., Fibres, Plastics, and Rubbers A Handbook of Common Polymers, Academic Press
Inc., New York, 1956

20. Engineered Materials Handbook: Engineering Plastics, American Society for Metals (ASM)

21. Metals Handbook, Desk Edition, American Society for Metals (ASM) International,
Copyright 1985.


23. P.A. Schweitzer, Corrosion Resistance Tables Metals, Nonmetals, Coatings, Mortars,
Plastics, Elastomers and Linings, and Fabrics, Fourth Edition, Part B, Marcel Dekker,
Copyright 1995.

Appendix D - Air/Gas

The Air/Gas Tool provides a methodology for identifying the aging effects in portions of systems
and components that may be subjected to an internal environment of a variety of different gas
mixtures. The environments covered by this tool include atmospheric air, dry/filtered instrument air,
nitrogen, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, helium, halon, and refrigerants. This tool is designed for use
with any component that has a gas internal environment which includes, but is not limited to,
compressed air systems, instrument air systems, diesel air start systems, air cooling systems, standby
gas treatment systems, combustible gas treatment systems, HVAC/room cooling systems, hydrogen
systems, nitrogen systems, and dry spent fuel storage systems. It can also be used on portions of
tanks or other components normally subjected a gas environment, such as core flood tanks, borated
water storage tanks, condensate storage tanks, makeup tanks, etc.
The various materials covered in this tool consist of carbon, low-alloy, and stainless steel, nickel-
base alloys, galvanized steel, copper and copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper-nickel), aluminum
and aluminum alloys, cast iron, and non-metals such as glass, plastics, and elastomers.
For the most part, degradation mechanisms and subsequent degradation effects require a moist
environment (or pooled liquid), in addition to oxygen and/or a caustic substance. These
requirements for aging effects are essentially applicable for all materials covered. Therefore, this
tool initially establishes whether or not the conditions exist for aging effects to be demonstrated
regardless of the material. The tool then continues to apply various logics to identify specific aging
effects for the various materials covered. The result is a tool that adequately identifies applicable
aging effects for materials exposed to gas environments.

Air / Gas - Appendix D i
CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
2. MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTS ....................................... 2-1
2.1 Materials............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.2 Nickel-Base Alloys.............................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.3 Carbon Steel and Low-Alloy Steel ...................................................................... 2-3
2.1.4 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys....................................................................... 2-3
2.1.5 Cast Iron............................................................................................................... 2-3
2.1.6 Copper and Copper Alloys (Brass, Bronze, and Copper-Nickel)........................ 2-4
2.1.7 Galvanized Steel .................................................................................................. 2-5
2.1.8 Non-Metals.......................................................................................................... 2-5
2.2 Environments ..................................................................................................... 2-6
2.2.1 Air........................................................................................................................ 2-6
2.2.2 Nitrogen............................................................................................................... 2-6
2.2.3 Hydrogen............................................................................................................. 2-7
2.2.4 Carbon Dioxide.................................................................................................... 2-7
2.2.5 Helium................................................................................................................. 2-7
2.2.6 Refrigerants.......................................................................................................... 2-7
2.2.7 Halon.................................................................................................................... 2-8
2.2.8 Fission Gases....................................................................................................... 2-8
3. AGING EFFECTS .......................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Loss of Material ................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1.5 Erosion................................................................................................................. 3-5
3.1.6 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC).................................................. 3-5
3.1.7 Wear and Fretting................................................................................................ 3-6
3.2 Cracking ............................................................................................................. 3-7
3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage............................................................................................... 3-7
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking................................................................................... 3-8
3.2.3 Vibration............................................................................................................ 3-10
3.2.4 Mechanical/Thermal Fatigue............................................................................. 3-10
3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness .................................................................. 3-10
3.3.1 Thermal Aging................................................................................................... 3-10
3.3.2 Radiation Embrittlement.................................................................................... 3-11
Air / Gas - Appendix D ii
3.4 Distortion.......................................................................................................... 3-11
3.5 Change in Material Properties/Cracking Non-Metals .............................. 3-11
3.6 Summary of Potential Aging Effects.............................................................. 3-13
3.7 Operating History............................................................................................ 3-13
3.7.1 NPRDS Review................................................................................................. 3-13
3.7.2 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence........................................................ 3-17
3.7.3 Summary of Industry Document Search............................................................ 3-20
4. FLOW DIAGRAM/SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT..... 4-1
4.1 Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Overview............................................................................................................. 4-2
4.3 Tool Description................................................................................................. 4-2
4.4 GALL Comparison............................................................................................ 4-4
5. REFERENCES................................................................................ 5-1

Air / Gas - Appendix D iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1 Air/Gas Tool................................................................................................... 4-16

Air / Gas - Appendix D iv
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary................................................................. 3-16
Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Air/Gas................................................................. 4-7

Air / Gas - Appendix D 1-1
1. INTRODUCTION
The Air/Gas Tool is intended to cover numerous environments and many different materials. In
addition to including coverage of typical gas systems such as instrument air, compressed air, diesel
starting air, nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, helium, refrigerants, halon, and BWR off-gas
systems, this tool includes the logic necessary to evaluate portions of equipment normally exposed
to a gas environment such as the nitrogen blanket in core flood tanks, the hydrogen environment in
makeup tanks, etc. This tool also includes the logic to evaluate various portions of HVAC systems,
which includes but is not limited to control room/safety-related-area cooling systems, as well as
containment air sampling systems.
This gas tool provides a logical and consistent approach to identifying applicable aging mechanisms
for materials subjected to an air/gas environment. Due to the various plant modes of operation,
varying environments, and multiple system functions, the application of one Mechanical Tool may
not be sufficient to completely identify all significant aging concerns. Some plant components are
alternately subjected to gas and fluid environments depending on the system mode of operation.
Fluid storage tanks typically have surfaces which are not subjected to the fluid environment of the
tank. Equipment such as heat exchangers are often open to the environment for extended periods of
time during repair activities. Other scenarios include equipment shutdown conditions under which
components may be placed in dry lay-up in either a controlled or non-controlled environment. In
cases such as those listed above, one single Mechanical Tool may not provide all the necessary
information required to completely evaluate the equipment. Therefore, the use of more than one tool
may be appropriate to assure that all equipment environments are covered and all potential aging
concerns identified.
The various materials used in passive parts of the above described components and systems typically
include a number of metals and alloys. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and stainless steel are typically
used for piping, tanks, pressure vessels, and accumulators, although nickel-base alloys may also
have limited use. Portions of air and gas system piping, tubing, and fittings may also include brass,
bronze, or other copper and copper alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and cast iron. Ductwork
for air supply systems may be constructed of galvanized steel, may include non-metallic material,
and can include a variety of the above metals.
The wide range of materials used for these systems, and the diverse environments that they are
subjected to, complicate the development of an all encompassing tool. This is ameliorated by the
lack of appreciable contaminates in most of the systems, which results in an environment that is not
conducive to the onset and/or propagation of most degradation mechanisms.
An integral part of the development of this tool is consideration of industry failure data contained in
the NPRDS (or EPIX) data base. This data base is limited to information for the reportable
systems and not all systems for which this tool is designed are reportable. When using this tool for
non reportable systems or for systems which are not within the license renewal scope, this tool
should be supplemented with other industry or plant-specific equipment failure history to assure
completeness.
The materials and environments covered in the Air/Gas Tool are discussed in Section 2.0. Aging
effects, and the mechanisms that can lead to those effects, that apply to the material and environment
combinations are discussed in Section 3.0. The development of the evaluation flow chart, logic, and
associated summary table is presented in Section 4.0.
Applicable aging effects include loss of material, cracking, change in material properties (e.g.,
reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), and loss of mechanical closure integrity. Loss of
mechanical closure integrity is not addressed in the Air/Gas Tool, but is treated separately in
Appendix F. This tool is restricted to internal environment and material combinations. Aging
effects for the external surface of materials in various environments, such as humid air, are
addressed in Appendix E. Evaluation of heat exchangers is performed with the tool contained in
Appendix G. Likewise, the evaluation of fatigue cracking is addressed in Appendix H and is not
covered in this Air/Gas Tool.

2. MATERIALS AND ENVIRONMENTS
The Air/Gas Tool is intended to assist the evaluator in determining locations within gas systems that
may be susceptible to one or more of the following aging effects: cracking, loss of material,
reduction in fracture toughness, and distortion. This tool is also intended to cover portions of
equipment and/or systems that are in contact with a gas environment (e.g., core flood tank nitrogen
blanket, fuel oil tank air space, and makeup tank hydrogen blanket) in addition to being in contact
with fluids discussed in Appendices A-C.
The materials addressed in this tool are discussed in Section 2.1 and the various environments are
defined in Section 2.2.
2.1 Materials
metals and stainless steel cladding, (2) nickel-base alloys, including nickel-base alloy weld metal,
(3) carbon steels and low-alloy steels, (4) aluminum and aluminum alloys, (5) cast iron, (6) copper
and copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper-nickel), (7) galvanized steel, and (8) non-metals such
as glass, plastics, and elastomers.
The stainless steels discussed in this tool are divided into the following categories: (1) wrought
stainless steels, (2) cast stainless steels, (3) weld metals, and (4) stainless steel cladding. Each is
discussed below.
martensitic, (4) precipitation hardening, and (5) duplex stainless steels. Definitions of the
aforementioned groups of stainless steels are provided in Reference 1 and are not repeated here.
Martensitic and precipitation hardening stainless steels are typically used for bolting, valve stems,
and pump shafts, and are not evaluated in this tool. [Note: valve stems and pump shafts are not
subject to aging management review, in accordance with the discussion in Section 2.0 of the main
document.] Bolted closures are addressed in Appendix F.
The cast stainless steels addressed in the Gas Tool all contain ferrite in an austenitic matrix (i.e., CF
series) and are commonly known as cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS). Typical alloys used in
nuclear applications include CF-8 (and CF-8A) and CF-8M, which are cast counterparts of wrought
Types 304 and 316, respectively. Other castings include CF-3 and CF-3M, which are cast
counterparts of Types 304L and 316L, respectively. Alloys CF-3M and CF-8M are modifications of
CF-3 and CF-8 containing 2% to 3% molybdenum and slightly higher nickel content to enhance
resistance to corrosion and pitting. CF-8A is a modification to CF-8 in that a controlled amount of
ferrite imparts higher tensile properties.
wrought stainless steels include SMAW, SAW, GMAW, gas tungsten-arc welding (GTAW), and
electroslag [1].
The weld metal is assumed to be equivalent to the wrought austenitic stainless steels with respect to
the discussions of loss of material and resistance to cracking (initiation) in Section 3.0. However, it
should be noted that welds are typically more resistant to SCC because of ferrite content. Also, the
strength and toughness of selected stainless steel weld metals used to join wrought stainless steels
were shown to vary depending upon the welding process used [17]. For example, flux welds, such
as SAW and SMAW, were shown to provide joint properties with higher strength and significantly
lower toughness than the surrounding base metal. Higher strength of the weld metal results in
enhanced load bearing capacity compared to base metal; lower toughness of the weld metal may
result in a reduced ability to support structural loads if the weld metal cracks. The strength and
toughness of non-flux welds, such as GMAW and GTAW, were shown to be similar to the
surrounding base metal.
Stainless Steel Cladding Material
Stainless steel cladding within the scope of the license renewal rule (and thus within the scope of
this Gas Tool) is exposed to borated water or a moist gaseous environment and is typically austenitic
stainless steel. Cladding may take the form of weld deposit or stainless steel plate that is either
explosively applied or rolled onto carbon or low-alloy structural steel. A detailed description of
weld deposit cladding is provided in Section 3.0 of Reference 2. The cladding is assumed to be
equivalent to the wrought austenitic stainless steels with respect to the discussions of loss of
material, cracking, and reduction of fracture toughness in Section 3.0 of this appendix.
The nickel-base alloys that are typically used for nuclear applications include nickel-chromium-iron
alloys such as Alloy 600 and Alloy 690. These materials are used primarily for their oxidation
resistance and strength at elevated temperatures. The applications are typically restricted to the
reactor coolant system (e.g., reactor vessel CRDM nozzles), but may also be found in selected non-
Class 1 components such as the core flood tanks. In addition, Alloy 600 may also be used in
fasteners, which are discussed in Appendix F.
components to carbon or alloy steel vessels in the reactor coolant system. Alloy 82/182 metals are
also used as cladding in selected components within the reactor coolant system. In addition, Alloy
52 and Alloy 152 are typical filler metals used to join Alloy 690 components to carbon or alloy steel
vessels in the reactor coolant system.
corrosive resistance is not required and is the material of choice for pumps, valves, tanks and fittings
in most plant water, air, and gas systems. The term carbon steel as used in the aging evaluation
applies to all carbon and low-alloy steels.
Aluminum and its alloys have limited use in nuclear plant applications. However, due to its high
resistance to corrosion in atmospheric environments, in fresh and salt water, and in many chemicals
and their solutions, it can be found in various gas system applications.
Typical applications of aluminum at nuclear plants are in various instruments in gas and fluid
systems. Aluminum and aluminum alloys may also have limited use as ductwork in air supply
systems. Aluminum and aluminum alloys can also be used in the housings of fans and heaters.
2.1.5 Cast Iron
good retention of strength and hardness at elevated temperature, but they are most often used for
their excellent resistance to wear and abrasion. Gray cast iron has several unique properties that are
derived from the existence of flake graphite in the microstructure. Gray iron can be machined easily
at hardnesses conducive to good wear resistance. It has outstanding properties for applications
involving vibrational damping or moderate thermal shock. Ductile cast iron is similar to gray iron in
composition, but during casting of ductile iron, magnesium and cerium are added to the molten iron
to give the final product higher strength and ductility. Malleable iron has similar properties to
ductile iron; however, it is more expensive to manufacture and is only used for thin section castings,
and for parts requiring maximum machinability or where a high modulus of elasticity is required.
This Gas Tool evaluates only the more widely used white and gray cast iron alloys. Although
comprising two general categories, various alloying elements can be and are added to cast iron
alloys to promote an array of hardness, corrosion resistance, heat resistance and abrasion resistance
properties [1].
White Cast Iron
Gray Cast Iron
Alloy Cast Irons
excellent high temperature properties, while a silicon content above 14% yields an alloy that is
extremely resistant to corrosion, particularly in acidic environments [5]. Corrosion resistance can be
increased in white, gray, or nodular iron by adding nickel, chromium, and copper (or a combination
thereof) or silicon in excess of 3% [1]. These alloying elements promote the formation of a strongly
protective surface film under oxidizing conditions (such as exposure to acids). High nickel alloys
containing greater than 12% nickel provide excellent resistance to corrosion and heat. These high
nickel alloys also contain 1 to 6% chromium and as much as 10% copper which enhance corrosion
resistant properties. The addition of copper results in better resistance to sulfuric acid and
atmospheric corrosion. The high abrasion resistance and excellent corrosion resistance of high
chromium white irons have resulted in the development of several alloys containing 20 to 35%
chromium [1].
However, due to the specialized nature of the alloys, the availability and the cost, they have a very
limited application at most plants.
Bronze and brass are copper alloys using predominantly copper, tin, and zinc, with various other
alloying agents present in differing amounts. Brass is an alloy of copper and zinc with other metals
in varying lesser amounts. Bronze is any of various alloys of copper and tin, sometimes with traces
of other metals. Other copper alloys are used in other applications, most notably copper nickel
alloys in condenser and heat exchanger tubing material.
and silicon brasses/bronzes are used where higher strength alloys are required. Various alloys of
brass and bronze are used in a number of applications including fire protection sprinkler systems,
compressed air, and instrument air systems.
2.1.7 Galvanized Steel
Galvanized steel is produced by taking steel sheets and coating them with zinc or iron-zinc alloys.
The corrosion resistance of the galvanized steel is directly proportional to the amount of zinc in the
coating. The metallic zinc is applied to iron and steel by one of three processes: hot dip galvanizing,
electro-galvanizing, or zinc spraying. A majority of the galvanized steel sheet metal is produced by
the hot dip process [Reference 1, p. 4-26]. The hot dip process is one in which an adherent
protective coating of zinc and iron-zinc alloys is applied by immersing the steel in a bath of molten
zinc. This process utilizes a series of layers with each successive layer containing a higher
concentration of zinc. This produces a gradual transition through the coating with no discrete line of
demarcation.
Galvanized steel is used where corrosion resistance in at atmospheric environment is required. The
relatively low production cost and appearance make galvanized steel an ideal choice for air system
ducts [Reference 1, pp. 4-26, 4-94].
2.1.8 Non-Metals
Uniform, selective, or localized attack can occur. When hot water attacks glass, it is not dissolved in
the usual sense; it hydrolytically decomposes. Resistance to water varies from excellent to poor
depending on the glass composition. There are a wide variety of glass compositions with modifiers,
fluxes, and stabilizers added to obtain various properties, including corrosion resistance [5]. No
definitive instances of glass failure due to an aging effect have been recorded in industry operating
experience searches. Gas environments do not contain hydrofluoric acids or caustics, nor would
glass be exposed to hot water in these environments.
pipe, it is rigid and resists abrasion, as well as being chemically resistant, especially to halogens. It
is impervious to deionized water which can cause organic and inorganic particulates to leach from
PVC. PVDF is highly corrosion resistant and can withstand years of in-ground exposure to moisture
and chemicals [22].
acceptability for the use of thermoplastics within a given environment is a design driven criterion.
Once the appropriate material is chosen, the system will have no aging effects.
used in nuclear plants in various capacities, such as joint sealants (e.g., for duct and fans in HVAC
systems), moisture barriers, and flexible connections. The outstanding characteristic of rubber and
elastomers is resilience or low modulus of elasticity. Flexibility accounts for most applications.
However, chemical and abrasion resistance, and good insulating qualities, result in many corrosion
applications. Generally speaking, the natural rubbers have better mechanical properties than the
synthetic or artificial rubbers (e.g., neoprene), but the synthetics have better corrosion resistance [5].
For example, natural rubbers are degraded by ozone and sunlight, whereas synthetic rubbers are not
affected by ozone and are typically much more resistant to sunlight (or other forms of ultraviolet
radiation) [5 and 19].
2.2 Environments
This tool includes a majority of the gaseous internal environments to which components within the
scope of license renewal may be subjected. Numerous components may be subjected to different
gaseous environments depending on plant and system operating conditions. The various gaseous
environments covered by this tool are described below.
2.2.1 Air
Air is composed of mostly nitrogen and oxygen with smaller fractions of various other products and
inert gases, including water vapor. The internal surfaces of a majority of components are at some
time exposed to air either continuously (as in a forced air system) or intermittently (as during
maintenance). External contact with air is described in Appendix E. Where air is the intended
internal fluid (e.g., compressed air and instrument air systems), it is supplied in either its natural
state or in a dry condition. Oil may also be present in compressed air depending on the method of
compression.
2.2.2 Nitrogen
Nitrogen is an inert gas that is used in many nuclear plant applications to place components in a dry
lay-up condition or to provide an overpressure where low oxygen content is desirable. Primary
storage of nitrogen is in tank(s) as a very low temperature liquid and it is usually preheated prior to
use in plant components. Intermediate storage is typically in heat traced piping or tanks.
Experience has shown that commercial grade nitrogen is provided as a high quality product with
little if any external contaminants [12]. In BWRs, the primary containment atmosphere is typically
inert nitrogen to minimize the risk of a fire but may include, depending on plant-specific operating
experience, some amount of dissolved oxygen or become saturated during normal plant operations
and particularly during outages, when the primary containment is open to air.
2.2.3 Hydrogen
Hydrogen has limited use in nuclear plants as an oxygen scavenger to control primary water
chemistry. In PWRs the reactor coolant makeup tank may contain a hydrogen blanket to scavenge
oxygen from the makeup fluid. Hydrogen is injected into the reactor primary fluid in many BWRs
as a means to control oxygen content. Hydrogen is also used as a coolant for the electrical
generator; however, the generator cooling system is not within the scope of license renewal and is
not a reportable system in NPRDS, and the absence of failure data requires that plant-specific and
other industry data be used to identify all appropriate aging effects in that system.
Hydrogen can also be present as a result of a corrosion process or due to electrolysis [5]. However,
an extremely corrosive environment is necessary for the generation of significant amounts of
hydrogen and such an environment does not typically occur in the air and gas systems covered by
this tool.
2.2.4 Carbon Dioxide
Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless incombustible gas. It is used in nuclear plants as a fire
suppression gas for several major plant components including diesel and hydro generators. The
carbon dioxide systems of interest at nuclear plants contain dry carbon dioxide in gaseous form.
Without the presence of moisture, this gaseous carbon dioxide is not a contributor to corrosion or
other aging effects [1].
2.2.5 Helium
Helium is a colorless, odorless, and inert gas and, as such, demonstrates no chemical reactivity. As
a result, helium in its pure form has no impact on corrosion or corrosion rates and, even as a
contaminant, does not affect the corrosion rates of materials. Corrosion covered by this tool is
impacted by the presence of oxygen, moisture, and other contaminants. These conditions are
required for the advancement of corrosion regardless of the presence of helium.
2.2.6 Refrigerants
Fluorocarbons constitute a large family of fluorinated hydrocarbon compounds that exhibit similar
chemical properties and a wide range of physical characteristics. Their inert character and the range
of their vapor pressures, boiling points, and other physical properties makes them especially well
suited for use as the working fluid in refrigeration and air conditioning systems, and as a propellant
for pressure-packaged products. The fluorocarbons covered by this Mechanical Tool are inert,
nonflammable, colorless, and relatively nontoxic. Fluorocarbons show no appreciable
decomposition at temperatures up to 400F and oxidize only with extreme difficulty and at very high
temperatures. The fluorocarbons are noncorrosive to all common metals except at very high
temperatures. Water or water vapor in fluorocarbon systems will corrode magnesium alloys or
aluminum containing over 2% magnesium; however, such corrosion will neither be speeded nor
slowed by the fluorocarbon presence [14].
The refrigerant systems covered by this tool are typically pressurized closed loop systems mixed
with an oil lubricant. These systems contain in-line refrigerant dryers for enhancement of both
performance and corrosion prevention. Unless contamination of the closed system with moisture
and/or sulfur occurs, the conditions necessary for internal pressure boundary degradation due to
corrosion do not exist [15]. Plant operating experience should be reviewed to assure that moisture
and/or aggressive species intrusion conditions do not exist at the users site.
The EPA is requiring the use of replacements for fluorocarbons. Some of the replacement gases are
corrosive, flammable, and toxic. Any metal that is susceptible to chloride induced pitting and SCC
may exhibit degradation. If replacement gases are corrosive, then the systems in which they are
used must be screened for potential aging effects.
2.2.7 Halon
Halon is used as a fire extinguishing agent in built-in systems and handheld portable extinguishers.
Halon, a halogenated hydrocarbon, is a liquefied, compressed gas that stops the spread of fire by
chemically disrupting combustion. Halon 1211 (a liquid streaming agent that gasifies under normal
atmospheric conditions) and Halon 1301 (a gaseous flooding agent) leave no residue and are
remarkably safe for human exposure. Halon is most effective for flammable liquids and electrical
fires and is electrically non-conductive. Halon is one of the most commonly used fire suppressants,
but has sufficient ozone depleting potential that its production and use should be restricted. Non-
ozone depleting alternatives to Halon could be sufficiently corrosive to cause corrosion failure of
fire suppressant storage and distribution systems. If replacement gases are corrosive, then the
systems in which they are used must be screened for potential aging effects.
2.2.8 Fission Gases
Systems at nuclear plants can be subjected to a variety of short and long lived gaseous radioisotopes,
some of which can be highly corrosive. The off gas holdup tank and upstream piping are likely to
contain iodine which is a halide and has corrosive tendencies similar to chlorine and sulfur. Other
fission gases may also cause a highly corrosive environment. Although the off-gas system contains
radioactive elements, the pressure boundary material is not subjected to neutron irradiation, which
would be a concern for brittle fracture of the pressure boundary material. The other radiation levels
present in the off-gas system are not sufficient to cause a pressure boundary integrity concern.

3. AGING EFFECTS
The Gas Tool addresses aging effects that result from aging mechanisms described in various Aging
Management Guidelines, technical references, and other industry sources. Where specific
mechanisms are not applicable under the environmental and material conditions covered by this tool,
justification is provided for a not applicable determination. For those effects that are applicable, a
detailed discussion of the environmental conditions necessary for the effects to be manifested is
included. Aging effects discussed below include loss of material, cracking, and change in material
properties (e.g., reduction of fracture toughness, distortion) for materials exposed to various gas
environments. If one or more of the aging mechanisms is credible, then the aging effect is assumed
to be applicable for the period of extended operation.
Each of the various aging mechanisms is discussed for all environments and for the materials listed
in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this tool. For the most part gases provide an environment for aging effects
only in the presence of moisture or other contaminants.
General corrosion is the result of a chemical or electrochemical reaction involving a material and an
neutral or near neutral media, oxygen and moisture are the factors that affect the corrosion of iron.
Both oxygen and moisture must be present because oxygen alone or water free of dissolved oxygen
does not corrode iron to any practical extent [4]. Carbon and low-alloy steels as well as cast iron
are susceptible to general corrosion, whereas stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, aluminum
and aluminum alloys, copper and copper alloys, and galvanized steel are resistant to general
corrosion [6].
The general corrosion effect is an electrolytic reaction and, regardless of the particular gas
environment, depends on the presence of oxygen and moisture. Corrosion in a non-aqueous
environment only occurs by direct chemical reaction and only at high temperatures well above those
encountered in applications of this tool [Reference 1, p. 4-89]. Nitrogen and carbon dioxide
environments should have negligible amounts of free oxygen; therefore, corrosion of carbon steel
and cast iron components in these environments should not be a concern. Hydrogen is used in the
gas space of the makeup tank to scavenge oxygen from the reactor coolant fluid, which results in an
oxygen free environment. Any other system and/or components subjected to a hydrogen
environment will also be free of oxygen and, likewise, will not be susceptible to general (uniform)
corrosion.
The air environments within plant systems and components can vary from clean, dry air to moist,
contaminated air whose purity is dictated by the source of the air. Portions of compressed and
instrument air systems contain air that has been processed through dryers and filters which provide
dry, oil free air to the downstream portions of the system. Moisture should not be a concern for
these portions of systems and general corrosion would not be expected. The Generic Aging Lessons
Learned (GALL) Report [18] supports this conclusion so long as plant-specific operating experience
does not indicate that moisture and contaminants have been introduced into normally dry portions of
systems. Operating experience exists (see Section 3.7.1) showing that failures of dryers and filters
have resulted in the introduction of sludge, moisture, and other contaminants into dry portions of gas
bearing systems. Plant-specific operating experience should be reviewed to assure that the user of
this tool has not also had these failures.
With respect to air sources for plant systems, (e.g., ventilation and intake systems), atmospheres can
be classified as industrial, marine, or rural for the purposes of this tool. Corrosion is primarily due
to moisture and oxygen but is accentuated by contaminants such as sulfur compounds and sodium
chloride. Corrosion of carbon steel on the seacoast is 400 to 500 times greater than in the desert
area [8]. Steel specimens 80 feet from the shoreline corroded 12 times faster than those 800 feet
away [8]. Sodium chloride is the primary contaminant of concern. Industrial atmospheres can be 50
to 100 times more corrosive than desert areas [8]. Locations where moisture condenses or
accumulates and does not dry out for long periods of time can cause damage sometimes referred to
as sheltered corrosion [8]. The definition of a long period of time is dependent on the material
and the contaminants present. In some cases months may be required, in other cases several days
may be sufficient to result in corrosion [8]. While this tool does not evaluate general corrosion
rates, users are encouraged to research general corrosion rates for their local area. This may involve
locating corrosion data from nearby industrial sites and/or reviewing data presented in EPRI TR-
103840, BWR Containments License Renewal Industry Report, Revision 1, J uly 1994. Upon review
of this data, bounding corrosion rates can be determined and utilized in evaluations of the impact of
these rates on the intended functions of components (for example, the effect of combined exterior
and interior corrosion rates on a pressure boundary wall thickness for the period of extended
operation).
Galvanized steel is carbon steel protected by coating the surface with zinc. Zinc is used because of
its corrosion resistance in atmospheric conditions and because it provides galvanic protection of the
base metal where discontinuities or damage of the coating has occurred [5]. The zinc corrosion
products tend to be alkaline thereby neutralizing normal acidic moisture that occurs in industrial
environments [9]. In the pH range between 6 and 12, zinc undergoes negligible corrosion under
most environmental conditions. When exposed to water, the corrosion resistance of zinc is
maintained only in this pH range. Outside this pH range, the increased corrosion rate significantly
reduces the usefulness of zinc as a protective coating. Temperature also affects the corrosion rate of
galvanized steel. Several studies indicate that between 140
o
F and 200
o
F, the corrosion products are
significantly more conductive than those formed above or below these temperatures. The corrosion
products at 185
o
F were noted to be about 1,000 times more conductive (a measure of impurities)
than those at 75
o
F (in distilled water) [9]. Therefore, the potential for degradation of the zinc
coating can occur on wetted surfaces in this temperature range. For example, corrosion may occur
at points or in an HVAC system where moisture can condense and/or collect in the above
temperature range or outside the above pH range.
In summary, carbon and low-alloy steels and cast iron are susceptible to general corrosion in
saturated/moist air environments, and in nitrogen or other gas environments where the gas becomes
saturated and/or includes some amount of dissolved oxygen. General corrosion (uniform attack) is
not a concern in dried air, nitrogen, CO
2
, hydrogen, halon, or fluorocarbon (refrigerant)
environments. Corrosion that may occur at the interface of a blanket/cover gas and a liquid is more
likely to be localized attack rather than a uniform loss of material and is discussed in the appropriate
section below. Galvanized steel is susceptible to general corrosion in wetted locations in the
temperature range of 140F to 200F or outside the pH range of 6 to 12.
the presence of a corrosive environment [5]. Generally the effects of galvanic corrosion should be
precluded by design (e.g., isolation to prevent electrolytic connection or using similar materials).
Carbon and low-alloy steels have lower potentials than stainless steels and would be preferentially
attacked in a galvanic couple. Particular attention should be paid to component replacements and to
carbon or low-alloy steel system interfaces with stainless steel systems.
The severity of galvanic corrosion depends largely on the type and amount of moisture present. The
atmosphere, and consequently air source, at or near the ocean will be much more conducive to
galvanic corrosion. Galvanic corrosion does not occur when the metals are completely dry since
there is no electrolyte to carry the current between the two electrode areas [4]. Any gas/moisture
interface that contains dissimilar materials with significant potential differences may be susceptible
to galvanic corrosion. Air systems can be susceptible to galvanic corrosion due to the different
materials used and the potential for moisture in crevices and other low points of systems. Aluminum
to brass connections as well as steel to copper connections are susceptible to galvanic corrosion [4].
Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, and aluminum and aluminum alloys in contact with a more
cathodic (noble) material in the galvanic series are susceptible to galvanic corrosion in the presence
of an electrolyte such as a water-saturated gas or in a location where moisture can condense and
collect (e.g., air storage tank). Copper and copper alloys are in the middle of the galvanic series
with steel, alloy steel, cast iron, and aluminum and aluminum alloys being more anodic (or active)
and with the stainless steels and nickel-base alloys being slightly more cathodic (or passive).
Therefore, copper and copper alloys in contact with a stainless steel or nickel-base alloy may be
susceptible to galvanic corrosion in the presence of an electrolyte.
Furthermore, an aggressive species, such as saltwater (salt air) in marine (seashore) areas or sulfur
dioxide in industrial areas, may increase the electrolytic potential of the normal atmosphere
(humidity). As such, galvanic corrosion may be a potential aging mechanism for dissimilar metal
connections involving susceptible materials when ambient outdoor air is the source. Examples of
potential areas are in air intake or HVAC systems for plants whose operating experience has shown
exposure to aggressive species such as salt air in seashore areas or sulfur dioxide in industrial areas.
Crevice corrosion occurs when a crevice exists in a component that allows a corrosive environment
to develop within the crevice. It occurs most frequently in joints and connections, or points of
contact between metals and nonmetals, such as gasket surfaces, lap joints, and under bolt heads [5].
Crevice corrosion is strongly dependent on the presence of dissolved oxygen and aggressive
environments such as the presence of S, Cl, or I. An oxygen content in the fluid is required to
initiate crevice corrosion [9]. Although the oxygen content in crevices can differ significantly from
the bulk fluid oxygen levels due to oxygen depletion, etc., a bulk fluid oxygen level or the presence
of contaminants to sustain the chemical reaction is necessary for the continued corrosion in the
crevice [5]. For systems with extremely low oxygen content (<0.1 ppm), crevice corrosion is
considered to be insignificant [9].
In addition to oxygen and a moist environment, an aggressive chemical species (e.g., halides,
sulfates) and moisture can provide an environment severe enough to propagate crevice corrosion.
The contaminant level of these aggressive species in the gas sources used in nuclear plants is
generally assumed not to be adequate to produce concentration levels that will promote corrosive
effects, unless subjected to cyclic wet/dry conditions [1]. Moisture that either falls from the air as
precipitation (covered in the external surfaces tool) or condensation on exposed surfaces can be
considered a cyclic phenomenon if it can occur on the internal surfaces of material covered by this
tool [5].
Providing that the oxygen content of the liquid environment is sufficiently controlled, maintaining
an inert gas over-pressure on a tank will preclude the occurrence of crevice corrosion, due to the
lack of oxygen. Components subjected to a stagnant environment with little or no oxygen control
(such as tanks open to the atmosphere) provide an ideal situation for the progression of crevice
corrosion. When a nitrogen over-pressure is placed on a tank (such as the core flood tanks), the
concentration of the existing oxygen in the tank is reduced; however, the total amount of oxygen in
the gas space has not changed. Unless a means of controlling this oxygen is present, the amount of
oxygen is still sufficient to promote crevice and pitting corrosion. In a closed environment the gas
space over a liquid will become saturated. However, unless there is a cycling of wetting/drying the
contaminant level in the gas environment is assumed not to be sufficient to provide the aggressive
environment necessary for crevice corrosion. Material at the gas to fluid interface is susceptible to
crevice corrosion due to the possible wetting/drying cycling as the fluid level changes.
In summary, all materials are susceptible to crevice corrosion given a sufficiently narrow crevice in
the presence of oxygen. Stainless steels and aluminum alloys are notoriously susceptible to attack
[7]. Crevice corrosion of copper and copper-based alloys is a result of oxygen depletion in the
crevices such that the crevice metal is anodic relative to metal outside the crevice that is exposed to
an oxygen-bearing environment. For most copper metals, the location of the attack is generally
outside the crevice, immediately adjacent the crevice region. Copper-zinc alloys with less than 15%
zinc content exhibit high resistance to crevice corrosion whereas copper-zinc alloys with greater
than 15% zinc are susceptible [1]. The level of oxygen for any specific application will vary with
any gas environment other than air, and the oxygen content may be sufficiently low to preclude
crevice corrosion concerns. Unless precluded by the use of dryers and/or filters, most gas
environments contain some amount of moisture. Crevice corrosion is a concern where this moisture
may pool in the presence of contaminants such as halides or sulfate.
Pitting is a form of localized attack that may progress through the wall of a component. It is one of
the most destructive and insidious forms of corrosion because it causes equipment to fail due to
perforation with only a small percent material loss of the entire structure. Failures are due to intense
corrosion with failures sometimes occurring with suddenness [5]. Pits require a long incubation
period before they are made evident by sudden failure. Pit growth is unique in that it is auto-
catalytic or self-stimulating and self-propagating after it is initiated [7].
Another form of pitting corrosion can occur at a gas to liquid interface. This form of corrosion is
Pitting corrosion is an aggressive corrosion mechanism that is more common with passive materials
such as austenitic stainless steels than with non-passive materials. All nuclear plant materials of
interest are susceptible to pitting corrosion under certain conditions. Most pitting is associated with
halide ions, with chlorides, bromides, and hypochlorites being prevalent [5]. Copper-zinc alloys
with less than 15% zinc content exhibit high resistance to pitting corrosion whereas copper-zinc
alloys with greater than 15% zinc are susceptible. Aluminum bronze alloys with greater than 8%
aluminum are also highly susceptible to pitting [1].
3.1.5 Erosion
Erosion is the loss of material due to a flowing fluid. Impingement and solid particle erosion is
caused by the impact of particles or liquid on a material. Elbows or T-type joints where the fluid
flow changes direction are particularly susceptible to erosion [5].
This mechanism is not applicable to gas flow at the flow rates and contaminant conditions in nuclear
plant systems and equipment.
microbiological activity and usually occurs at temperatures between 50 and 120F. Microbiological
organisms disrupt the protective oxide layer of the metal and produce corrosive substances and
deposit solids that accelerate the electrolytic reactions of corrosive attack, generally in the form of
pitting or crevice corrosion. The microbiological organisms can be either aerobic or anaerobic,
depending on the available oxygen content. MIC is facilitated by stagnant conditions, fouling,
internal crevices, contact with untreated water from a natural source, and contact with contaminated
soils. MIC damage (e.g., due to contact with contaminated soils) to the exterior of components is
covered in Appendix E.
Microbes can be introduced into air handling systems in a variety of ways, especially through
unfiltered air that contains dust particles. Rainwater splash can also introduce microbes, as can
water spray borne by wind. MIC is a potential problem where contamination from untreated water
or soil may have introduced the microbes into the gas bearing system in sufficient quantities to cause
MIC. Air and gas systems are only affected where stagnant conditions exist in wetted locations (i.e.,
the pooling of an aqueous solution) provide an environment suitable for propagation of the
mechanism.
Wear can result from the movement of a material in relation to another material that can occur
during the active functions of a component. Components in this category are not addressed by this
tool (e.g., air compressor, pump, or valve operations). Wear can also occur as a result of movement
on the external surfaces of equipment. Any such external component wear is covered in Appendix
E.
Fretting is caused by small amplitude vibratory motion (e.g., flow induced vibration [FIV]) which
results in removal of material between two contacting surfaces [5]. With the exception of heat
exchangers, other passive components in systems containing gas are not susceptible to this
mechanism. Heat exchangers are evaluated separately in Appendix G.
General wear and fretting are, therefore, not applicable to the equipment covered by this tool, with
the exception of elastomers, addressed separately in Section 3.5.
most common example is the selective removal of zinc in brass alloys (dezincification). Common
yellow brass (30% zinc and 70% copper) is most susceptible to this mechanism. Lower zinc levels
and the addition of 1% tin, for example, significantly reduce the susceptibility of the material [5].
There are two general types of dezincification: uniform attack and localized plug attack. In both
types of dezincification, the zinc ions stay in solution while the copper plates back onto the surface
of the brass. Zinc can corrode slowly in pure water by the cathodic ion reduction of water into
hydrogen gas and hydroxide ions [5]. For this reason, dezincification can proceed in the absence of
oxygen. The rate of corrosion, however, is increased in the presence of oxygen. This process
occurs in clean water, with no additional contaminant required for initiation [5].
Gray cast iron can also display the effects of selective leaching particularly in relatively mild
environments. This process initiates with selective leaching of the iron or steel matrix leaving the
graphitic network. The graphite is cathodic to iron, providing an excellent galvanic cell. The iron is
environment that corrodes this metal rapidly (e.g., saltwater), uniform corrosion can occur with a
rapid loss of material strength which can go undetected as the corrosion appears superficial [5].
Aluminum bronze can be subject to de-alloying similar to the dezincification of brass. Aluminum
brasses are used to resist impingement attack where turbulent high velocity saline water is the fluid.
These alloys form a tough corrosion resistant protective coating due to the buildup of aluminum
oxide. Proper quench and temper treatments for some of the aluminum bronzes produces a tempered
structure that is superior in corrosion resistance to the normal annealed structures. Unless they are
inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As, aluminum brasses are susceptible to selective leaching.
3.2 Cracking
more of the following aging mechanisms: hydrogen damage, stress-corrosion cracking, vibration,
and fatigue.
Hydrogen damage results from absorption of hydrogen into the metal. It includes the following
degradation mechanisms:
Hydrogen blistering
Hydrogen embrittlement
Decarburization
Hydrogen attack
Hydrogen blistering occurs as a result of the diffusion of monatomic hydrogen into voids in a metal.
The atomic hydrogen then combines to form molecular hydrogen, which is unable to diffuse through
the metal. The concentration and pressure of hydrogen gas in the void then increases with a
resultant blistering of material. This mechanism is most prevalent in the petroleum industry where
chemical reactions produce significant levels of atomic hydrogen [5]. It is not a concern for the
components within the scope of this tool.
Hydrogen embrittlement is the degradation of material mechanical properties as a result of
absorption of monatomic hydrogen into the material. As in hydrogen blistering, embrittlement
requires the presence of atomic hydrogen as a result of some chemical process. High strength steels
are the most susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement, with the greatest susceptibility occurring around
70
o
F. The susceptibility decreases rapidly as the temperature varies above and below 70
o
F [4, 6].
Alloying steels with nickel or molybdenum reduces hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility [4, 6].
The stainless steels and nickel-base alloys are considered immune to hydrogen embrittlement in
most cases [4]. At yield strengths of less than 120 ksi for carbon and low-alloy steels, concern
regarding hydrogen cracking is alleviated except when the material is temper embrittled [2]. Since
the yield strength of most of the piping and components in air and gas system applications is on the
order of 30 to 45 ksi, hydrogen embrittlement is considered not applicable to carbon and low-alloy
steels.
Decarburization, or the removal of carbon from steel, is produced by moist hydrogen at high
temperatures. Decarburization is extremely slow below 1,000
o
C [4], which is significantly above
the temperatures to which nuclear plant components are subjected.
Hydrogen attack refers to the interaction between hydrogen and a component of an alloy at high
temperatures. An example is the disintegration of oxygen-containing copper in the presence of
hydrogen [5]. As in decarburization, hydrogen attack is a high temperature process at temperatures
well above those of nuclear plants.
Raychem Cryofit couplings are particularly sensitive to hydrogen embrittlement when subjected to a
hydrogen environment at high temperatures (pressurizer region). These couplings are made of a
special alloy (50% titanium and 50% nickel) called Tinel. The failure of these couplings in a high
temperature (~600
o
F) and high hydrogen content in the pressurizer gas space was attributed to
hydrogen embrittlement as documented in NRC Information Notice No. 91-87. No other
information as to hydrogen limits or temperature limits is available. For the purposes of this tool,
any Cryofit couplings should be considered susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement if connected to
the pressurizer gas space. This includes the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).
With the exception of Raychem Cryofit couplings, hydrogen damage is considered not applicable to
the materials and environments expected to be encountered during application of this tool.
Stress corrosion cracking is a mechanism requiring a tensile stress, a corrosive environment, and a
susceptible material in order to occur. Intergranular attack is similar to stress corrosion cracking
except that stress is not necessary for it to proceed. However, due to the typical operating
temperature ranges of gas systems, IGA is generally not a concern for these systems. With the
exception of PWR reactor coolant system materials, stress corrosion cracking is of concern for
PWRs and BWRs in low-alloy steels, austenitic and martensitic stainless steels, and nickel-base
alloy components. Piping carbon steels are considered resistant to SCC when the yield strength is
less than 100 ksi [13]. Since the yield strength of most piping is in the 30-45 ksi range, SCC is not
considered applicable to piping carbon steels. The detailed evaluation and identification of
operational and residual stresses are beyond the scope of this tool. It is assumed that the materials
within the scope of this tool contain sufficient stresses to initiate SCC given an environment
conducive to the progression of SCC.
Intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) is a major concern in a BWR primary system
environment. The combination of dissolved oxygen in BWR coolant and sensitized austenitic
stainless steels, associated primary system components, piping, and BWR vessel internals renders
BWRs extremely susceptible to this mechanism. Other factors affecting the susceptibility to this
mechanism include crevices, cold work during material fabrication, flow velocity, and exposure to
sulfates or halogens. To assist in the control of IGSCC in the BWR primary system environment,
BWRs typically add hydrogen to suppress the formation of the oxidizing radiolytic products [16].
As this gas tool is not intended for use in the BWR primary fluid environment, the unique
susceptibility to IGSCC in this environment is not included within this tool logic.
SCC of Stainless Steel (Wrought and Cast)
SCC has occurred in stainless steel, typically in water systems containing dissolved oxygen,
sulfates, fluorides, or chlorides. The presence of oxidizers often has a pronounced effect on cracking
tendencies. In fact, the presence of dissolved oxygen or other oxidizing species is critical to the
cracking in all chloride solutions. If the oxygen is removed, cracking will only occur when chloride
concentrations are very high [4]. In general, SCC very rarely occurs in stainless steels below 140F
[1]. However, with a harsh enough environment (for example, significant contamination with
halogens), SCC can occur in austenitic stainless steel at ambient temperature.
For the gas atmospheres covered by this tool, a concern arises when moisture-containing
contaminants concentrate, resulting in an environment conducive to SCC. The contaminants
affecting stainless steel include sea water, chloride solutions, hydrogen sulfide, and sodium
hydroxide [5]. The user of this tool should determine from plant-specific operating experience if
such concentrations of contaminants have occurred at the plant, and if such concentrations are likely
to occur in the future.
alloys such as Alloy 600 and Alloy 690. The applications are typically restricted to the reactor
coolant system (e.g., reactor vessel CRDM nozzles), but may also be found in selected non-Class 1
components such as the core flood tanks. Alloy 690 was shown in the laboratory to be resistant to
SCC in primary environments. However, there have been reported cases of SCC in Alloy 600 [3].
SCC of nickel-base alloys has been found to occur in three types of environments: high temperature
halogen ion solutions (e.g., chlorides in the percent range), high temperature waters, and high
temperature alkaline environments, especially above 400F. In addition, SCC has been detected in
liquid metals, near-ambient temperature polythionic acid solutions, and environments containing
acids and hydrogen sulfides (H
2
S). The conditions that promote SCC in nickel-base alloys are much
more severe than those that promote SCC of the common stainless steels [23].
The air and gas environments covered by this tool do not typically include sufficient contaminants
and/or temperature to result in SCC of nickel-base alloys in wetted locations. As such, SCC of
nickel-base alloys is not an applicable aging mechanism in the air and gas environments covered by
this tool.
Pure aluminum is not susceptible to SCC; however, aluminum alloys containing more than 12% zinc
or more than 6% magnesium are very susceptible to cracking under mild corrosive environments [5].
SCC of aluminum alloys is characteristically intergranular. Research indicates that water or water
vapor is the key environmental factor required to produce SCC in aluminum alloys. Halide ions
have the greatest effect in accelerating attack, with chloride the most important halide ion because it
is a natural constituent of marine environments and is present in other environments as a
contaminant. Aluminum alloys in the 2xxx, 5xxx, and 7xxx wrought series are the least resistant to
SCC, while the resistance of casting alloys (xxx.x series) is sufficiently high that cracking rarely
occurs in service [23].
The best known example of stress corrosion cracking is probably the so called season cracking of
brass, so called due to its similarity to the cracking of seasoned wood. Ammonia (NH
3
) and
ammonium (NH
4
+
) salts are the corrosive substances most often associated with SCC of copper
alloys. These compounds are sometimes present in the atmosphere; in other cases they are in
cleaning compounds or chemicals. Both oxygen and moisture are necessary for ammonia to be
corrosive to copper alloys; carbon dioxide is also thought to contribute to the process in NH
3

atmospheres. Moisture films on metal surfaces will dissolve significant quantities of NH
3
, even
from atmospheres with low NH
3
concentrations [4, 5, 23]. Brass containing less than 15% Zn is
highly resistant to SCC, even under severe conditions. Additionally, brass is susceptible to SCC in
moist air containing trace amounts (0.05 to 0.5 vol%) of sulfur dioxide (SO
2
) [23].
Bronze and other copper alloys are considerably more resistant to stress corrosion cracking than the
brass (copper-zinc) alloys [4]. An exception is aluminum bronze which has demonstrated a
susceptibility to SCC in moist ammonia environments. For the purpose of this tool the bronzes, with
the exception of aluminum bronze, are considered immune to stress-corrosion cracking.
However, the nuclear plant air/gas environments addressed by this tool typically do not contain
detectable amounts of ammonia, ammonium salts, or sulfur dioxide. As such, SCC of copper and
copper alloys is not a concern in air and gas environments unless plant-specific operating experience
indicates detectable amounts of ammonia and ammonium compounds (e.g., due to organic decay,
bird excreta, or cleaning solvent) or sulfur dioxide (e.g., in industrial areas). For plants with such
operating experience, SCC of high zinc (>15% Zn) brasses and aluminum bronzes (e.g., >8%Al)
are a concern in moist (e.g., humid) and wetted locations.
3.2.3 Vibration
Material fatigue resulting from vibration has been observed in the nuclear industry and can result in
crack initiation and growth. Vibration induced fatigue is fast acting and typically detected early in a
components service life and is corrected to prevent recurrence. Corrective actions usually involve
modifications to the plant such as the addition of supplemental restraints to a piping system, the
replacement of tubing with flexible hoses, or the isolation/elimination of the vibration source when
possible. Based upon these considerations, cracking due to vibration fatigue is not considered an
applicable aging effect for the period of extended operation of the plant but is a
design/installation/maintenance issue rather than an aging effect.
Aging mechanisms of mechanical and thermal fatigue are evaluated separately in Appendix H.
The fracture toughness of wrought austenitic stainless steel, cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS),
and nickel-base alloys is typically higher than that of carbon and low-alloy steels. Aging
mechanisms that may lead to reduction of fracture toughness include thermal embrittlement,
radiation embrittlement, and hydrogen embrittlement. Hydrogen embrittlement is covered in
Section 3.2.1 of this tool, which discusses hydrogen damage. The susceptibility of the materials
listed in Section 2.1 to reduction of fracture toughness is discussed below.
3.3.1 Thermal Aging
Thermal aging, sometimes referred to as thermal embrittlement, is a time and temperature dependent
mechanism where microstructural changes lead to increased yield and tensile strength properties,
decreased ductility, and degradation of toughness properties. Cast austenitic stainless steels and
precipitation-hardenable stainless steels are the only materials currently known to be susceptible to
thermal aging for PWR and BWR conditions. Embrittlement of CASS is a concern for license
renewal at temperatures of 250C (482
o
F) or more [11].
Galvanized carbon steel is also susceptible to the effects of embrittlement at elevated temperatures.
It was originally thought that galvanized steel could be used at temperatures up to the melting point
of zinc (approximately 785
o
F) [23]. More recent studies have indicated the potential for
embrittlement of galvanized steel at temperatures significantly below the melting point of zinc.
Observed crack propagation in galvanized steel is typically intergranular. At lower temperatures,
the time required for failure increases as does the associated minimum required stress level
necessary to cause embrittlement [29]. Based on work discussed in Reference 29, as well an
application upper temperature limit established by the American Galvanizers Association,
embrittlement of galvanized steel should be considered a plausible aging mechanism if the steel is
exposed to temperatures above 400
o
F.
Neutron irradiation can result in a decrease in fracture toughness of metals; however, it requires a
neutron fluence far exceeding the neutron exposures of the components and systems in the non-
Class 1 category [3]. Therefore, radiation embrittlement is considered not applicable to the
components with gas environments.
3.4 Distortion
Distortion may be caused by plastic deformation due to temperature-related phenomena (e.g., creep).
In general, distortion is addressed by the design codes and is not considered an applicable aging
effect. Creep is not a plausible aging mechanism since the high temperatures required for this
mechanism to occur (generally at temperatures >40% of the alloy melting point) are not observed in
commercial nuclear plant systems [3].
3.5 Change in Material Properties/Cracking Non-Metals
Glasses
Because most silicate glasses have a high resistance to corrosion in normal environments, glass per
se is frequently considered to be an inert substance. Silica is almost insoluble in an aqueous
environment except at temperatures in excess of 482F. Acid attack of soda-lime and borosilicate
glass compositions is minimal due to the formation of a protective, highly siliceous surface layer,
except for hydrofluoric and phosphoric (at high temperatures) acids [24]. Air and gas systems at
nuclear plants do not typically contain contaminants that could concentrate and chemically attack
glass.
Weathering is a term commonly given to the attack of glass surfaces by atmospheric gases and
moisture whereby the surface of the glass becomes dimmed, fogged, and in extreme cases, pitted
(high humidity or exposure to alternating cycles of moisture condensation and evaporation can leach
alkalis from the surface that react with water and create a very-high pH environment on the surface
of the glass that can cause the silicate network to dissolve and visible deposits to form [25]). But
with most common compositions (i.e., soda-lime glasses), increased surface alkalinity and
enhancement of the attack are needed to cause problems. High silica (e.g., >96%), borosilicate, and
aluminoborosilicate glasses are fully resistant to the weathering phenomenon [24]. Since the air and
gas systems for nuclear plants do not contain contaminants that could concentrate and enhance
alkaline attack of glasses, chemical degradation or hydrolysis of glass is not an applicable aging
mechanism in the environments addressed by this tool.
Plastics
The environment can be a severely limiting factor in the selection and use of plastic materials. The
differences between an office and an industrial environment are as significant as the differences
between an indoor and an outdoor exposure, with four critical parameters for proper selection:
operating temperature, stress level, chemical exposure, and adjoining materials [26]. In air systems,
the temperatures to which the surfaces of any plastics are exposed are dictated by the ambient
conditions in the location and by internal temperatures (such as in HVAC systems or air start
systems). Stress levels are assumed to be adequate for degradation since determination of the actual
residual, or molded-in, stresses is not feasible for the purposes of this tool.
The chemical resistance of many engineering plastics is excellent. Plastics are used routinely in
environments in which metals would rapidly fail. However, most plastics have specific weaknesses
in terms of chemical attack. Failure of plastics due to chemical exposure can be classified as
plasticization, chemical reaction, and environmental stress cracking. Plasticization requires
exposure to a fluid with which a given plastic is somewhat miscible. Chemical reactions occur
between a plastic and an environmental substance that lowers molecular weight or otherwise
degrades mechanical properties. Environmental stress cracking is a phenomenon in which a stressed
part develops crazing and cracking from exposure to an aggressive substance [26].
Chemical environments can actually degrade a polymer (plastic) by breaking down the polymer
chains and altering the material properties. Certain polymer types are more susceptible than others
to specific degradation mechanisms, which can include hydrolysis, thermal degradation, oxidation,
and photo-degradation, but all polymers can be degraded by at least one mechanism. With exposure
to aqueous environments, hydrolytic degradation of susceptible polymers can occur at very slow
rates but can become perceptible at conditions of either low (<4) or high (>10) pH. Thermal
degradation of susceptible polymers (e.g., high molecular weight polymers) can occur upon
exposure to elevated temperatures such as experienced during molding or extrusion operations, but
would be much slower in end-use environments due to the lower temperature. Oxidation may occur
when many polymers are exposed to oxygen-containing environments; however, susceptible
polymers typically have additive stabilizers and antioxidants that will preserve polymer properties at
least until the additives have been consumed. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation can be the source of energy
that will abstract an atom from the polymer backbone and start the oxidation process. Oxidation
initiated by UV radiation will result in eventual loss of properties; although plastics exposed to UV
typically have chemical additives which retard these processes, these additives eventually will be
consumed and the degradation will proceed [27].
Furthermore, polymers such as PVC and PVDF are resistant to seawater environments up to
temperatures of 150F and 270F, respectively. PVDF is also resistant to moist/wet sulfur dioxide
up to temperatures of 200F, whereas Type 1 PVC is resistant to moist/wet sulfur dioxide up to
100F [28]. Assuming proper selection, the air and gas environments addressed by this tool do not
typically contain contaminants that could concentrate, or experience elevated temperatures that
could result in plasticization and environmental stress cracking of plastics. Degradation of plastics
by UV radiation and aggressive environments is addressed separately in Appendix E.
Elastomers
For a complete discussion of the aging effects of typical elastomers used in nuclear plants and the
associated industry operating experience, the user of this tool is referred to EPRI report 1002950,
Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [19].
Although the related discussions in EPRI 1002950 are by nature focused on the external surface, the
aging mechanisms (and applicability criteria) discussed therein are also applicable to the internal
surfaces of elastomers in mechanical systems, such as sealants for ducts in HVAC systems, except
as noted below.
While not addressed in EPRI report 1002590, which is focused on sedentary structural components,
elastomers in mechanical systems (e.g., joint seals and flexible connections) may also experience
wear as a result of their flexible nature and the small vibrations and/or movement of rotating
components (e.g., fans). As such, loss of material due to wear of elastomers materials may be a
concern. However, this concern is dependent on the specific elastomer (for which abrasion
resistances vary) and condition, and thus requires plant-specific consideration. As described in
Section 3.2.3, significant vibration and movement of components is typically detected and corrected
early in component life (a design issue).
Table 4-1 contains a summary of the various aging mechanisms and effects considered during the
development of this tool. Also included are the conditions necessary for these aging effects to be
manifested and the various materials that are susceptible to these effects. Figure 1 provides a
depiction of the corresponding logic and decision points for the various aging mechanisms that are
applicable in air and/or gas internal environments.
Additionally, EPRI report 1002590 [19] addresses the potential aging effects for elastomers,
including the conditions necessary for the effects to be manifested. That information is not
duplicated in this tool. However, due to their flexibility, wear of elastomers may be a potential aging
mechanism for elastomers.
An operational history review was performed using NPRDS, its successor EPIX, and NRC generic
communications that apply to air and gas systems. Each is reported separately below.
3.7.1 NPRDS Review
The Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS) contains information on plant operating
experiences up through 1997. From 1997 through the present, this data is contained in the
Equipment Performance and Information Exchange (EPIX) system. The purpose of a review of this
material is to assure that failures of in-scope equipment due to aging are considered and also to
assure that overly conservative assessments of equipment aging are not made (e.g., assuming
hydrogen damage of various equipment is plausible when plant operating data does not support that
finding).
The Air/Gas Tool encompasses numerous systems, environments, and materials. As a result, it
would be extremely time consuming to sort and review all NPRDS and EPIX entries that cover this
entire spectrum of combinations. The search criteria included all NPRDS and EPIX reportable
systems normally associated with a gas environment, as well as all area cooling systems for which
failure data was available. There are several concerns and/or precautions regarding the use of this
data; however, the informative nature of the data outweighs the recognized limitations.
For the NPRDS data base query, the following search conditions were selected:
Selected Safety Classes are Safety-Related Components, Non Safety-Related Components,
and Other
Selected Failure Cause Categories are Age/Normal Usage, Unknown (included Code X prior
to 4/94), and Other (was included in Code K prior to 4/94)
Selected NSSSs are Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Westinghouse PWRs, and
General Electric BWRs.
Selected Components are ACCUMU, FILTER, PIPE, PUMP, VALVE / DAMPER,
HEATER, BLOWER, and VESSEL
Excluded VALVE Failure Modes are Failed to Close, Failed to Open, Internal Leakage, Fail
to Operate Properly (Back-fit Only), Fail to Operate as Required, Premature Opening, and
Fail to Remain Open
Selected Failure/Cause Descriptions are Foreign Material/Substance (included AJ before
4/94), Particulate Contamination, Normal Wear (included AH before 4/94), Welding
Process, Abnormal Stress (Mech.) (included AQ before 4/94), Abnormal Wear (included in
AD before 4/94), Loose Parts (included AP before 4/94), Mechanical Damage (included BK
before 4/94), Aging/Cyclic Fatigue (Mech.) (included BL before 4/94), Dirty, Corrosion,
Mech. Binding/Sticking (included in BB before 4/94), Mechanical Interference (included in
BF before 4/94), Environmental Condition (code added 4/94), and Other (code added 4/94)
Selected Systems are Room/Area Cooling System-BW, Diesel Starting Air-BW, Penetration
Room Ventilation-BW, Room/Area Cooling System-CE, Diesel Starting Air-CE,
Containment Cooling-CE, Annulus Ventilation-CE, Penetration Room Ventilation-CE,
Room/Area Cooling System-W, Diesel Starting Air-W, Containment Fan Cooling-W,
Annulus Ventilation-W, Room Area Cooling-GE, Standby Gas Treatment-GE, Combustible
Gas Control-Recombiner-GE, Combustible Gas Control-Dilution-GE, Containment
Atmosphere cooling-GE, HPCS Power-Diesel Starting Air-GE, Diesel Starting Air-GE, and
Control Room Air Conditioning-GE
The purpose of the NPRDS / EPIX searches was to identify equipment failures resulting from the
effects of aging. As the EPIX search was conducted for Revision 3 of these tools, the above NPRDS
search conditions were matched as closely as possible for the EPIX queries. Although the EPIX
search conditions are not an exact match for the NPRDS conditions, a conservative approach was
taken when determining the appropriate search conditions. Although NPRDS and EPIX searches of
PWR and BWR data were conducted separately, the results are not reported separately in this gas
tool. Both the included systems and the recorded failures for the various reactor types are very
similar and separate discussions are not necessary. Using the above search criteria, 581 entries were
selected. These records were reviewed and those involving consumables such as failed/worn
gaskets, packing material failures, and other diaphragm, seal or sealant failures were excluded from
further consideration. Other failures relating to design problems, failures resulting from faulty
maintenance, clogged filters, and other various failures not related to equipment aging were also
excluded. Failures involving valve opening/closing and valve leakage concerns were also excluded
as these types of failures for the safety-related equipment are covered within the auspices of the
Maintenance Rule.
A majority of the selected entries were excluded. Of the 581 items identified, 304 involved valve
actuation, internals degradation/wear, or valve leakage problems which are considered active
failures and covered by the Maintenance Rule programs. Gasket, seal, sealant, diaphragm O-ring,
and other consumable related failures accounted for 121 of the entries; clogged filters or filters that
failed performance testing programs represented 40 entries; miscellaneous failures involving
mechanical and or electrical failures due to non-aging related concerns involved 61 entries.
There were 55 entries that represented equipment failures resulting from the effects of aging. Table
3-1 identifies the number of records attributable to the various aging mechanisms and includes a
percentage of the total for each category.

Table 3-1 NPRDS / EPIX Search Summary

FAILURE CAUSE NO. OF
ENTRIES
% OF
TOTAL
Wear 12 22
Vibration 7 13
Structural Integrity Loss 23 42
Corrosion 11 19
Fatigue (thermal cycling) 1 2
Aging (non-metal) 1 2

Wear of components that resulted in reportable equipment failures had various causes including
external wear, flex line failure, and wear of threads on a pipe connection. The failure of an above
seat spring on an air system valve was also included in this category. The vibration failures resulted
from close proximity to either compressors or air regulators. These failures included pressure
boundary failures of rigid lines, flex-lines and threaded piping connections, as well as in one case
the loosening of an air regulator cap.
Pressure boundary failures involved two distinct mechanisms: (1) corrosion mechanisms, and (2)
failures attributable to mechanical breakage or deformation of pressure boundary components
(classified as Structural Integrity Loss in the above table). The corrosion failures consisted of a
variety of corrosive mechanisms and affected a diverse population of components and equipment.
For the systems included in the search, failures due to corrosion were found to affect air system
components, various duct material, and charcoal filter casings. One listing of a broken hand-wheel
(the listing identified corrosion as the cause of failure) on an air system valve was also included in
this category.
The failures included in the loss of structural integrity category were very diverse. All pressure
boundary losses that did not fall into the valve leakage, or consumable category, and that did not
list corrosion as the cause of failure, were grouped in this category. These listings included air
system leakage, body to bonnet leaks (where no consumable failure such as O ring or gasket was
identified), filter casing leaks, valve body deformation, O ring seat erosion, and bushing
cracking/failures. Other failures included several cases of broken sight glasses on air system
components, one filter canister rupture on an air system filter, two wire mesh failures on filter
internals, the failure of a fin on an HVAC damper, and one case of the failure of a rubber lining in a
BWR standby gas system valve (the rubber failure resulted in flange leakage).
A majority of these loss of structural integrity failures could not be directly linked to specific
degradation mechanisms and, for some, the aftereffects of the failure (e.g., erosion of O-ring seat)
cannot necessarily be distinguished from the failure itself. It must also be noted that for a majority
of these failures the system was still capable of performing its required functions (per the NPRDS /
EPIX report sheet). What is not clear is whether the failure involved equipment required to perform
license renewal intended functions.
A fatigue failure to a compressor air line was attributable to excessive cycling of the compressor.
The last failure identified (non-metal) resulted from aging of a rubber expansion boot joint in a
ventilation system.
The following observations and limitations were noted during the review of the NPRDS / EPIX
entries.
1. It is often not clear as to the exact cause of failure due to the vagueness of the information
available. Although previous maintenance in some cases may be suspect, it is seldom identified
as a cause. Several cases of broken sight glasses on air system equipment may be the result of
unintentional damage during either inspections or repair activities, although aging of the glass
cannot be unequivocally excluded from consideration.
2. Due to the relative low cost of replacement of items in the air systems, the cause of failure is
often not evaluated as the items are replaced rather than repaired.
3. As the mechanics are not always well versed in aging and corrosion mechanisms, the identified
causes may not always be accurate. For example, rusting was listed as the cause of failure of
what was identified as aluminum duct.
4. It is not always clear for the listings evaluated here whether failures due to corrosion or wear
mechanisms were initiated internally or externally to the component. Only those failures
originating internally to a component are covered by this tool.
5. Many pressure boundary failures due to aging of consumables such as O rings, gaskets,
sealants, and diaphragms were revealed. This data does indicate that, for the most part, the
failures did not result in a loss of the system functions.
6. Many failures of air system components resulted from dirty or contaminated air supplies, which
resulted in oil, moisture, and sludge buildup.
7. Vibration induced failures are often not identified as such. However, in many cases failures
were apparent on equipment in very close proximity to air compressors and other vibrating
equipment. Numerous listings of threaded connections were identified in air compressor
discharge lines.
3.7.2 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence
A search was made of generic NRC correspondence that might relate to aging degradation in air and gas
mechanical pressure boundary components. Gas systems typically include instrument air, compressed
air, nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, off-gas systems and standby gas treatment systems. In addition
to air systems, other components that use or contain air and gas products include various fluid tanks, air
ducts in various air cooling systems, and air sampling systems, to name a few. These systems are
constructed from carbon steel, stainless steel, brass, bronze, aluminum, cast aluminum, and galvanized
steel and other non-metallic materials. The NRC generic correspondence searched included Circulars,
Bulletins, Information Notices, and Generic Letters. Of these, 10 were considered to be related, either
directly or indirectly, to air and gas system failures. Eight were Information Notices, 1 was a
Bulletin, and 1 was a Generic Letter. These entries are discussed briefly below. Not all involved age
related degradation phenomenon; however, each identified entry has been cited and discussed below.
Circulars
No circulars were identified that relate to aging concerns in air or gas systems.
Information Notices
IN 80-40: Excessive Nitrogen Supply Pressure Actuates Safety-Relief Valve Operation to Cause Reactor
De-pressurization
The excessive nitrogen supply pressure was due to addition of a new supply of liquid nitrogen to the
storage tanks. Nitrogen pressure supplying the safety-relief valves increased to 160-165 psi. This may
have been caused by liquid nitrogen reaching the pressure regulators or by a failure in a pressure
regulator (an active component). Therefore, there are no license renewal issues within this Information
Notice.
IN 81-38: Potentially Significant Equipment Failures Resulting From Contamination of Air-Operated
Systems
Air operated components and systems will occasionally become inoperable because they are
contaminated with oil, water, desiccant, rust, or other corrosion products. Problems of air system
contamination potentially pose a common mode failure condition. This information notice provides
several recommendations to minimize air system contamination problems, therefore reducing the
probability of air operated component failures. All recommendations are good maintenance practice
items.
IN 84-17: Problems with Liquid Nitrogen Cooling Components Below the NIL Ductility Temperature
Nitrogen is used at some sites for inerting the containment atmosphere during power operation. The
nitrogen is admitted to the containment after it is evaporated and warmed from its liquid form. There
are several controls in place to prevent liquid nitrogen from coming in contact with components such as
pipes.
Circumferential cracks were observed on piping which was due to brittle fracture caused by the piping
temperature having been below its nil ductility temperature. Failures of nitrogen evaporator and
isolation valve controls were the root cause of liquid nitrogen coming in contact with plant piping and
plant components. No aging issues are present in this generic communication.
IN 85-99: Cracking in Boiling Water Reactor Mark I and Mark II Containments Caused by Failure of
the Inerting System
This information notice is a follow up to IN 84-17 and advises of the discovery of another crack in a
drywell vent header which occurred during inerting system operation. The failure was attributed to
brittle fracture caused by the injection of cold nitrogen during inerting. This failure is a design and
system operation concern and is not the result of component aging.
IN 87-28 (Revision 0 and Supplement 1): Air Systems Problems at U.S. Light Water Reactors
This information notice and its supplement provide recipients a copy of NUREG-1275, Vol II,
Operating Experience Feedback Report Air Systems Problems.
Air system failures may cause significant damage to plant safety systems. The root causes of most of
the failures were traceable to design and or maintenance deficiencies. The design and operating
problems appear to reflect a lack of adequate attention to design, maintenance, operation, and
administrative control of air systems. No aging issues are present in this generic communication.
IN 91-87: Hydrogen Embrittlement of Raychem Cryofit Couplings
Failure of Cryofit coupling manufactured by Raychem occurred due to hydrogen embrittlement. All
couplings of this type have been replaced at one site. Raychem Cryofit couplings are made of a special
alloy (50 percent titanium and 50 percent nickel) called Tinel that expands as temperature is decreased
and contracts as temperature increases.
The cause of coupling failure was determined to be hydrogen embrittlement of Tinel. The high
hydrogen content in the exposure medium and high temperature was the critical determining factor. No
other combination of exposure environments resulted in degradation of the Tinel.
IN 92-32: Problems Identified With Emergency Ventilation Systems for Near-Site (Within 10 Miles)
Emergency Operations Facilities and Technical Support Centers
This information notice alerted licensees to potential problems resulting from inadequate
maintenance and testing of Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) and Technical Support Center
(TSC) emergency ventilation systems. These problems could result in a situation after an accident
in which the EOF or TSC would not provide the level of protection to emergency workers that was
intended. It was suggested that licensees review the information for applicability to their facilities
and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. This IN focused on inadequate
maintenance and testing, and no specific aging effects were discussed.
IN 93-06: Potential Bypass Leakage Paths Around Filters Installed in Ventilation Systems
This information notice alerted licensees to potential problems resulting from missing or
deteriorated seals around shafts that penetrate fan or filter housings and inadequately sealed ducting
seams used in engineered safety feature (ESF) ventilation systems. As discussed in Section 2.2 of
the Implementation Guide, seals are not subject to aging management review.
IE Bulletins
IE Bulletin 84-01: Cracks in Boiling Water Reactor Mark 1 Containment Vent Headers
This IE Bulletin was written to address the same concerns as those previously discussed in IN 84-17 and
IN 85-99. The cracks in the vent headers have been attributed to improper operation of the inerting
system. No aging concerns are applicable.
Generic Letters
GL 88-14: Instrument Air Supply System Problems Affecting Safety-Related Equipment
Inadequacies in design, installation, and maintenance of instrument air systems have resulted in failures
which adversely affect safety-related equipment. In addition, anticipated transients and system recovery
procedures are frequently inadequate and the operators are not well trained for coping with loss of
instrument air conditions.
The purpose of this generic letter is to request that each licensee review NUREG-1275, Vol. 2, and
perform a design and operations verification of the instrument air systems. There are no license renewal
issues associated with this generic letter.
3.7.3 Summary of Industry Document Search
The Industry Document Search consisted of a review of NRC correspondence, which included
Circulars, Information Notices, IE Bulletins, and Generic Letters. Of the ten industry documents
that identified potential aging concerns for air and gas systems, four identified concerns with
operation, design, installation, or maintenance of nitrogen addition systems. Three industry
documents involved the failure of instrument air systems due to inadequate design, installation,
maintenance, or operation of the system or its components. Although air or gas system
contamination from these inadequacies can cause or hasten the onset of pressure boundary
degradation, aging degradation is not the issue addressed in these industry correspondences. The
tool logic, however, does provide for consideration of contamination and the subsequent aging
effects resulting from air system contamination.
Only one industry document involved age related degradation of air or gas system equipment.
Information Notice 91-82 concerns the failure of Cryofit couplings manufactured by Raychem as a
result of hydrogen embrittlement. This aging concern is specifically addressed in this air/gas tool
logic.

4. FLOW DIAGRAM/SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT
4.1 Assumptions
The assumptions used to develop the evaluation flow chart are provided below.
1. The gas sources other than air (e.g., hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, halon, fluorocarbons)
evaluated as internal environments for this tool are clean dry sources with no significant levels
of contaminants such as chlorides, sulfates, or oxygen unless they are used as a cover
gas/blanket for a stored liquid, where contaminants may concentrate out of the liquid due to
alternate wetting and drying. Another exception is when replacement gases for halon or
fluorocarbons have been used. Some of these gases are corrosive. The flow chart evaluates the
applications where fluorocarbon/halon substitutes have been used.
2. Non-metallic consumable items (gaskets, O-rings, seals, and sealing compounds) are
excluded from aging management and are not covered.
3. Crevice corrosion requires some type of crevice (an opening usually a few thousandths or an
inch or less in width) to occur. It is unreasonable to expect an evaluator to respond to a
which would be difficult to predict. It would be unreasonable to expect an evaluator to establish
the presence of stresses resulting from the manufacturing process or post-installation welding
for every component under consideration. In these cases, the logic will conservatively assume
that the stress exists.
5. Macroorganisms are assumed not to be present to any significant degree for the purposes of this
tool. Macroorganisms are only present in raw water systems and, as such, are evaluated
separately in Appendix B.
6. Oxygen level is a significant parameter in many aging mechanisms. This tool assumes that the
level of oxygen in the atmosphere is at least above the threshold value to cause corrosive
effects.
7. Aggressive chemical species include, but are not limited to, oxygen, halides and sulfates. These
aggressive species significantly influence the nature, rate, and severity of corrosion. It is
generally assumed that atmospheric environments include airborne contaminants and, for the
purposes of this tool, it is assumed that these contaminants are present in all but the purest of
gases. It is also assumed that these contaminants are not at a sufficient level to result in
significant corrosion rates in gas environments unless they are concentrated as a result of cyclic
(wet-dry) condensation, accidental contamination, or chronic leakage.
8. Oil may be present in some air supply systems. Oil is not a good electrolyte and without other
contaminants does not create a corrosive environment [5, 10]. It is assumed for the purposes of
this tool that oil contamination does not result in any degradation effects over and above those
that would occur without the presence of oil contamination. The one exception is the potential
for oil contamination to provide a source of microorganisms to the gas system. Microorganisms
have been found in oil, especially where the oil quality is not maintained and/or the source of
the oil is from a reservoir or tank that may be contaminated.
9. Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of stainless steels is not a significant aging mechanism below
140F.
4.2 Overview
The Mechanical Tools are intended to provide an efficient method to identify applicable aging effects
for systems and components which are required to undergo an aging management review in
compliance with the license renewal rule. Utilization of these tools at the various sites will result in
the identification of aging effects that must be managed for plant equipment or that can be justified not
to require management during the period of extended operation. Demonstration of the adequacy of
aging management programs to manage these effects is outside the scope of this tool as discussed in
Section 4.0 of the main document (implementation guideline).
These tools identify potential aging effects and also direct the user to areas in the system where
these effects might be preferentially manifested. The discussions in Section 3 identified numerous
aging mechanisms and their associated aging effects which potentially can occur in the air and gas
system equipment addressed by this tool. This tool, Figure 1, then guides the user through logic to
determine, based on specific system or component materials, environment and/or operating
conditions, whether these effects are applicable. The tool described in the following sections
address the effects of aging on various materials when subjected to air and/or gas internal
environments. The tool is organized such that the individuals utilizing the tool do not require
detailed knowledge of aging mechanisms or their effects. The logic does, however, require that the
user be familiar with the materials of construction, various applicable environments, and all system
operating conditions.
The evaluation logic groups aging effects, such as loss of material and cracking, to efficiently
resolve the disposition of equipment. The results not only identify the effects which must be
managed but, given the mechanism applicability criteria, can be a valuable input when determining
how and where to implement aging management programs.
Table 4-1 (added in Revision 3) identifies applicable aging effects, and corresponding mechanisms,
that may require programmatic oversight (management) for the period of extended operation, as well
as the applicability criteria for the occurrence and propagation of the mechanisms. This table
summarizes the information depicted on the corresponding logic diagram (Figure 1) and is
organized alphabetically by material and aging mechanism. The potential aging effects, together
with the detailed mechanism discussions in Section 3.0 and assumptions in Section 4.1 of this
appendix, provide the basis for the development of the air and gas tool described below. The
materials and environments covered by these tools are described in Section 2.0.
Figure 1 contains the logic and criteria to evaluate aging effects for various materials in an air or gas
internal environment. As the EPA is requiring the use of replacements for fluorocarbons and halon
and some of the replacement gases are corrosive, any metal that is susceptible to chloride induced
pitting and SCC may exhibit degradation. This is covered in the upper branch of the logic, as is a
very specific issue that resulted from the NRC document search. Specifically the issue is hydrogen
embrittlement of Raychem Cryofit Couplings in the pressurizer gas space sample line. This issue
represents the only indication of hydrogen damage uncovered during the document search. A
review of information included in the referenced corrosion handbooks and other available
information indicates that likelihood of hydrogen damage to material at nuclear plants is extremely
low. Therefore, with the exception of the Raychem Cryofit Couplings in a hydrogen environment,
hydrogen damage is assumed not to occur. It is included in this tool to address the very specific
issue covered by NRC Information Notice 91-87.
Since moisture or fluid is necessary for the propagation of the remaining degradation mechanisms,
the logic provides for the exclusion of all dry gas and air environments. Components that are
subjected only to processed gases that contain little if any moisture are not likely to realize any
significant degradation mechanisms regardless of the material. Environments meeting this criteria
include dried/filtered air, clean processed nitrogen, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and halon.
HVAC and other air supply systems contain air with varying degrees of moisture content that, for
the most part, will not result in an aggressive environment. Unless situations produce a wetted
environment in these air systems, the logic provides for the conclusion that, with the exceptions of
general corrosion of cast iron or carbon steel and galvanic corrosion of susceptible materials in
electrolytic contact with a more cathodic (noble) metal in the galvanic series, there are no aging
effects. An example of a situation in which pooled water can occur in air HVAC systems is
immediately downstream of a cooler. In cases of extreme condensation on cooler tubes, moisture
carryover of entrained particles can occur with subsequent pooling immediately downstream of the
coolers. This pooling produces a wetted environment where corrosion of susceptible materials can
occur.
The next two logic provisions involve mechanisms that can occur under atmospheric moisture
conditions. Although system and component design should preclude the occurrence of galvanic
corrosion, it can be a significant aging mechanism as the results are sometimes hard to detect prior
to pressure boundary failure. Due to the variety of materials covered by this tool, galvanic corrosion
is a concern in moist air and gas systems. General corrosion is another degradation mechanism that
can occur under atmospheric moisture conditions. However, of the materials included in this tool,
only carbon steel and cast iron are susceptible in moist air and gas systems.
The remainder of the degradation mechanisms included in the tool logic require a wetted surface or
pooled liquid environment and the corresponding logic is divided such that stainless steels and
nickel-base alloys are addressed, then galvanized steel, then carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron,
copper and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys.
All materials are susceptible to microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) in wetted locations
(e.g., microbes/bacteria in dust particles can enter air intakes and collect in the wetted locations
associated with cooling coils). Therefore, a source of the microbe would have to be introduced into
an air gas environment for MIC to be of concern. Microorganisms can be introduced into a gas
environment from many sources. Some air spaces within the scope of this tool are in raw water
systems which may contain the microbes. Fire protection systems may also have air spaces and use
raw water as a source of water. Another source of microbe introduction can be from contamination
or leakage from a raw water source. As an example, leakage from a raw water chiller or cooler into
an air system could result in the introduction of MIC. The leakage may also provide for the wetted
environment necessary for the progression of this effect. Contaminated oil if used in air systems can
also provide for the introduction of these microorganisms.
Under wetted conditions all materials can be subject to crevice and pitting corrosion in the presence
of a contaminant such as chloride or sulfide. However, aluminum bronze with <8% Al content and
low zinc brasses have a high pitting resistance. In the presence of a contaminant, stainless steel, and
aluminum alloys containing >12% Zn or >6% Mg are susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking
(aluminum in its pure form is not susceptible to SCC). In addition, if ammonia or ammonium
compounds are present in the air or gas system, high zinc brasses and aluminum bronze are
susceptible to SCC.
Selective leaching in a wetted environment can occur with no other contaminants present. The logic
tree addresses this issue by singling out high zinc brass and gray cast iron as the materials
susceptible to this loss of material effect. (Selective leaching is commonly referred to as
dezincification and graphitization for these two metals respectively.) Aluminum bronze is
susceptible to a mechanism similar to dezincification and is also included in this category.
The last leg on the logic diagram addresses the thermal embrittlement of galvanized steel at
temperatures above 400F regardless of the environment.
4.4 GALL Comparison
The information in Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII in Volume 2 of NUREG-1801, Revision 1,
mechanical components. GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for
environments addressed by this tool. The identification and evaluation of aging management
programs (AMPs) is outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific basis,
as described in Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Table 4-
1, with the following material, environment, aging effect, and aging mechanism considerations.
The materials for the pertinent items in GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the
materials addressed by this tool, which are described in Section 2.1. Carbon or low-alloy steel is
referred to as steel in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool, and is listed alone
or with stainless steel. Cast iron is not listed specifically in the GALL items for environments
addressed by this tool but is included with steel. Copper and copper alloys are referred to as
copper alloy and aluminum and aluminum alloys are referred to as aluminum in the GALL for
environments addressed by this tool. In the GALL, the non-metals cited for environments addressed
by this tool are referred to as glass and elastomers. Plastics are not listed in the GALL for the
environments addressed by this tool.
The following GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII environments are bounded by the environments
addressed in this tool, which are described in Section 2.2:
Air
Air indoor uncontrolled (internal)
Air indoor uncontrolled (internal/external)
Air outdoor (internal)
Condensation (internal)
Diesel exhaust
Dried air
Gas
Moist air or condensation (internal)
The GALL items addressing glass in air (VII.J -7, VIII.I-4) concur with the conclusions of
Section 3.5 of this tool with respect to there being no applicable aging effects (aging effects
requiring management in the GALL) for glass exposed to air. Additionally, the GALL items that
cite aluminum (V.F-2, VII.J -2, and VIII.I-1), copper alloy (V.F-3, VII.J -3, VII.J -4, and VIII.I-3),
steel (V.F-18, VII.J -22, VII.J -23, and VIII.I-15), and stainless steel (IV.E-5, V.F-15, VII.J -18, VII.J -
19, and VIII.I-12) exposed to a dried air or gas environment concur with the conclusions of this tool
with respect to corrosion mechanisms requiring wetting (e.g., condensation) or other contaminants.
GALL Chapter VII items (VII.F1-7, VII.F2-7, VII.F3-7, and VII.F4-6) cite hardening and loss of
strength due to elastomer degradation in uncontrolled air, internal or external, without describing the
relevant conditions for elastomer degradation. These GALL items concur with Section 3.5 of this
tool, which references EPRI report 1002590 [19] for discussion of the applicable aging effects for
elastomers, and includes a description of the relevant conditions for the degradation of elastomers,
such as temperature, radiation, sunlight, and ozone (natural rubbers). Additionally, certain GALL
Chapter VII items (VII.F1-6, VII.F2-6, VII.F3-6, and VII.F4-5) cite loss of material due to wear as
an aging effect requiring management for elastomer seals and components that contain air, which is
more conservative than the discussion in Section 3.5 of this tool.
Additionally, the aging mechanisms identified in GALL Chapters V, VII, and VIII are grouped
without clear indication as to mechanisms (e.g., crevice corrosion) that are indicated as applicable to
certain components but not to others. The aging effects/mechanisms cited in GALL Chapters V,
VII, and VIII as requiring management for metals in the air, moist air, or condensation environments
includes loss of material and cracking (diesel exhaust), with the following groupings of mechanisms
depending on material susceptibility:
General (steel only), pitting and crevice corrosion from exposure to diesel exhaust
General and pitting corrosion of steel exposed to internal condensation
General corrosion of steel exposed to uncontrolled indoor air
General corrosion and fouling of drywell and suppression chamber spray system steel
exposed to uncontrolled indoor air
General, pitting, and crevice corrosion of steel exposed to internal condensation, moist air
or condensation, outdoor air, or uncontrolled indoor air
General, pitting, crevice and (for drain pans and drain lines) microbiologically influenced
corrosion of steel exposed to internal condensation
Pitting and crevice corrosion of stainless steel and copper alloy exposed to internal
condensation
Stress corrosion cracking of stainless steel exposed to diesel exhaust
The GALL items for the above environments do not identify galvanic corrosion in the air and gas
environments, whereas per Section 3.1.2, galvanic corrosion is evaluated in this tool and is
applicable to carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron, and aluminum/aluminum alloys in wetted
locations. The GALL does not identify cracking, due to SCC, in air and gas environments except
for stainless steel exposed to diesel exhaust, whereas it is evaluated in this tool, in Section 3.2.2, for
aluminum and aluminum alloys, certain copper alloys, and stainless steel.
The GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items that identify aging effects for external surfaces,
closure bolting, and heat exchangers are addressed separately in Appendix E, Appendix F, and
Appendix G, respectively. Likewise, GALL items for fatigue are evaluated separately in

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - Air/Gas
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
All Metals Cracking /
Hydrogen
Embrittlement
1. H
2
environment
and
2. RayChem Cryofit Couplings present

Hydrogen embrittlement and Raychem Cryofit
couplings are not addressed in GALL.
All Metals Loss of Material /
Pitting and/or
Crevice Corrosion
1. Replacement gas for fluorocarbons
(refrigerants) or halon (fire suppressants)
used
and
2. Replacement gas is corrosive
IV.E-5

V.F-18,
V.F-4,
V.F-15

VII.J -2,
VII.J -3,
VII.J -4,
VII.J -18,
VII.J -19,
VII.J -22,
VII.J -23

VIII.I-1,
VIII.I-3,
VIII.I-12,
VIII.I-15
No Sections 2.1, 2.2.6, 2.2.7, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL items indicate no aging effects
in dried air or gas environments for copper alloy,
steel, stainless steel. GALL does not address
potential for corrosiveness of replacement gases
in Chapters IV, V, VII, VIII, or IX.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
1. Gas is not dried air, N
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Material is in contact with a more
cathodic (noble) metal in the galvanic
series, in the presence of an electrolyte

Note: Moisture collected in crevices and
other low points in air systems, and
condensation, provide an electrolyte.
Aggressive species (such as salt air) in air
system intakes also provide an electrolyte.
V.F-2

No Sections 2.1.4, 3.1.2
Assumption 4.1.3

GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII do not
include items that cite galvanic corrosion in any
air or condensation environment. Specified
GALL item indicates there are no aging effects
requiring management for aluminum exposed to
uncontrolled air. GALL items VII.F1-14,
VII.F2-12, VII.F3-14, and VII.F4-10 cite only
pitting and crevice corrosion (see below) for
aluminum exposed to condensation.
Loss of Material /
MIC
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Component subject to wetted environment
and
3. Potential source of MIC
V.F-2 No Sections 2.1.4, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.8

include items that cite MIC of aluminum in any
air or condensation environment. Specified
GALL item indicates there are no aging effects
uncontrolled air.
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys
Loss of Material /
Pitting and
Crevice Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
3. A potential for concentrating
contaminants exists
VII.F1-14,
VII.F2-12,
VII.F3-14,
VII.F4-10

Yes Sections 2.1.4, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL items cite pitting and crevice
corrosion as aging effects requiring management
for aluminum exposed to condensation (wetted
environment).

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Aluminum and
Aluminum
Alloys (Contd)
Cracking / SCC 1. Gas is not dried air, N
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
3. A potential for concentrating contaminants
exists
and
4. Alloy with >12% Zn or >6% Mg
V.F-2 No Sections 2.1.4, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.4, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

address SCC of aluminum in any air or
condensation environment. Specified GALL
item indicates there are no aging effects
uncontrolled air.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy Steel
and Cast Iron
Loss of Material /
General Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
V.B-1,
V.A-19,
V.D2-1,
V.D2-16

VII.D-2

Yes Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.5, 3.1.1

Specified GALL items cite general corrosion for
steel exposed to uncontrolled air. GALL item
V.D2-1 also cites fouling of BWR drywell and
suppression chamber spray system components.
Fouling as an aging mechanism is no different
than pitting or crevice corrosion (discussed
below). GALL item VII.D-2 also lists pitting
corrosion of compressed air system components
due to internal condensation, but does not cite
crevice.

See pitting and crevice and MIC discussions
below.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Material in contact with a more cathodic
(noble) metal in the galvanic series, in the
presence of an electrolyte

See Below No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.5, 3.1.2
Assumption 4.1.3

GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items do not
address galvanic corrosion in any air or internal
condensation environment.

See pitting and crevice corrosion discussion
below for steel exposed to wetting (e.g.,
condensation); otherwise GALL items cite only
general corrosion for steel in air environments,
as described above.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy Steel
and Cast Iron
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
Pitting and/or
Crevice Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Component subject to a wetted
environment
and
contaminants exists (e.g., due to alternate
wetting and drying)
V.D2-17,
V.A-2,
V.A-3

VII.D-2,
VII.F1-3,
VII.F2-3,
VII.F3-3,
VII.F4-2,
VII.G-23,
VII.H2-2,
VII.H2-21

VIII.B1-6,
VIII.B1-7,
VIII.G-34
No Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.5, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL items cite general, crevice, and
pitting corrosion of steel in wetted environments
(e.g., condensation), except as below:
Item VII.D-2 cites pitting and general
corrosion (but not crevice) for steel exposed
to condensation.
Items V.A-2 and V.A-3 cite general, pitting,
and crevice corrosion for steel encapsulation
components exposed to air. V.A-3 clarifies
that items refer to air with leakage (wetting)
and also includes boric acid corrosion (See
Appendix E).
VII.F items also list MIC for drain pans/lines.
VII.H2-2 item addresses corrosion of steel or
stainless steel exposed to diesel exhaust.
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Carbon and
Low-Alloy Steel
and Cast Iron
(Contd)
Loss of Material /
MIC
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
VII.F1-3,
VII.F2-3,
VII.F3-3,
VII.F4-3
Yes Sections 2.1.3, 2.1.5, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.8

Specified GALL items list general, pitting,
crevice in steel ducting due to internal
condensation (see pitting and crevice discussion
above) and, for drain lines and drain pans
(wetted surfaces where airborne microbes may
collect and thrive), MIC.
Cast Iron and
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Selective
Leaching
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon,
or fluorocarbons
and
2. Component subject to wetted
environment
and
3. Material is gray cast iron or
Brass/bronze >15% Zn or
Aluminum bronze >8% Al
and
4. Material is not inhibited copper alloy

such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic, and
antimony (e.g., 1% tin to brass) effectively
inhibit dezincification. Aluminum bronzes
are inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% As.
None No Sections 2.1.5, 2.1.6, 3.1.8
Assumption 4.1.6, 4.1.7

include items for selective leaching of cast iron
or copper alloys exposed to internal
condensation (or other wetted location) in air
environments.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Material in contact with a more cathodic
(noble) metal in the galvanic series, in the
presence of an electrolyte

VII.G-9

No Sections 2.1.6, 3.1.2
Assumption 4.1.3

include items for copper alloy exposed to moist
air or for galvanic corrosion in moist air or
uncontrolled air environments.

Specified GALL item cites only pitting and
crevice corrosion (see discussion below) of
copper alloy exposed to condensation. GALL
items V.F-3 and VIII.I-2 indicate that there are
no aging effects requiring management for the
external surface of copper alloys exposed to
uncontrolled air.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
Loss of Material /
Pitting and
Crevice Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
contaminants exists
and
4. Material is Brass/Bronze >15% Zn or
Aluminum Bronze >8% Al
VII.G-9 Yes Sections 2.1.6, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL item cites pitting and crevice
corrosion of copper alloy, with distinguishing Zn
or Al content, to condensation (wetted
environment).

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of Material /
MIC
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
VII.G-9 No Sections 2.1.6, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.8

GALL Chapters IV, V, VII and VIII do not
include items for copper alloy exposed to moist
or uncontrolled air, or to internal condensation.
Also, the GALL includes MIC of only steel in
internal condensation.
Copper and
Copper Alloys
(Contd)
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon,
or fluorocarbons
and
2. Ammonia or ammonium salts present
(e.g., from organic decay or fertilizer
entering air system intakes from outside)
and
3. Component susceptible to wetted
environment
and
4. Material is Brass >15% Zn or Aluminum
Bronze >8% Al
Assumptions 4.1.4, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

include items for cracking of copper alloys.
Galvanized
Steel
Loss of Material /
General Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
2. Temperature <212F
and
and
4a. pH >12 or pH <6
or
4b. Temperature >140F and <200F
VII.J -6 No Sections 2.1.7, 3.1.1

Only GALL items V.F-1 and VII.J -6 specifically
address galvanized steel exposed to uncontrolled
air, with V.F-1 addressing the external surface of
ducting. Both items indicate there are no aging
effects that require management for galvanized
steel exposed to uncontrolled air.
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Galvanized
Steel (Contd)
Reduction of
Fracture
Toughness /
Thermal
Embrittlement
1. Temperature >400F None No Sections 2.1.7, 3.3.1

GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII items do
not address reduction (loss) of fracture toughness
in air and gas environments.
Loss of Material /
Pitting and
Crevice
Corrosion
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon,
or fluorocarbons
and
2. Component subject to wetted
environment
and
contaminants exists
V.D2-35,
V.A-26,
V.D1-29

VII.D-4,
VII.F1-1,
VII.F2-1,
VII.F3-1,
VII.H2-2
Yes Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.1, 4.1.3, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL items cite pitting and crevice
corrosion for stainless steel when exposed to
internal condensation (wetting). GALL item
VII.H2-2 cites pitting and crevice corrosion of
stainless steel exposed to diesel exhaust with no
indication of whether wetting is involved.
Stainless Steel
and CASS and
Nickel-Base
Alloys
Loss of Material /
MIC
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
V.D2-35,
V.A-26,
V.D1-29

VII.D-4,
VII.F1-1,
VII.F2-1,
VII.F3-1,
VII.H2-2
No Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.6
Assumption 4.1.8

include items for MIC of SS or nickel-base alloys
in air or internal condensation environments. As
per above, specified items only cite pitting and
crevice corrosion in wetted (i.e., condensation)
environments and diesel exhaust.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Stainless Steel
and CASS
2
, CO
2
, H
2
, halon, or
fluorocarbons
and
and
contaminants exists
and
VII.H2-2 Yes Sections 2.1.4, 3.2.2
Assumptions 4.1.4, 4.1.6, 4.1.7

Specified GALL item lists SCC of stainless steel
exposed to diesel exhaust (where a concentration
of contaminants is possible, as are periodic
temperatures above 140F).

Figure 1 Air/Gas Tool
Y
Y Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
N
N
Y Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
N N
N
Y
Air / Gas
Environment?
Is the fluid a dried air,
nitrogen, CO
2
,
hydrogen, halon, or
fluorocarbon?
Have replacement gases for
fluorocarbons or halon been used?
Loss of material due to crevice/pitting
general corrosion is a
concern.
Carbon or
Low Alloy
Steel or
Cast Iron?
to general corrosion is
not a concern.
Are replacement
gases corrosive?
Loss of material due to crevice/pitting corrosion
is a concern.
Hydrogen
environment
present?
Cracking due to hydrogen
embrittlement is not a concern.
Are Raychem Cryofit
Couplings present?
Cracking due to hydrogen
embrittlement is a concern.
Is component
subject to
wetting?
Is component in contact with a
more cathodic (noble) metal in the
galvanic series, in the presence of
an electrolyte (e.g., condensation)?
may be a concern.
not a concern.
Is there a
potential source
of MIC?
may be a concern.
not a concern.
a concern.
crevice, pitting
corrosion, MIC,
selective leaching, and
cracking due to SCC
are not a concern.
Stainless
Steel?
Temperature
>140F?
not a concern.
Is there potential for
concentrating contaminants?
corrosion and cracking due to SCC are
not a concern.
Galvanized Steel with
Temperature >400F?
Thermal embrittlement is not a concern.
Y Y
Y
Thermal embrittlement is a concern.
N
Y
Is material Gray Cast Iron or
Brass/Bronze w/ >15% Zn
or Alum. Bronze w/ >8% Al?
Copper alloy is
not Inhibited?
selective leaching is
not a concern.
selective leaching is a
concern.
Material is not
Brass/Bronze <15%Zn or
Aluminum Bronze <8% Al?
Loss of material due to crevice/pitting
Aluminum Alloy w/ >
12% Zn or >6%Mg?
Brass w/ >15% Zn
or Alum. Bronze w/
>8% Al?
Ammonia or
ammonium
salts
present?
a concern.
not a concern.
Galvanized Steel?
Is pH >12
or PH <6?
Loss of material due to general corrosion is a concern.
Temperature >140F
and <200F?

5. REFERENCES
1. Metals Handbook, Desk Edition, American Society for Metals, 1985.
3. J. F. Copeland, et al., Component Life Estimation: LWR Structural Materials Degradation
September 1987.
4. H. H. Uhlig, Ph.D., ed., Corrosion Handbook, John Wiley & Sons, Ninth Printing, May 1948.
5. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., Copyright 1986.
6. J. F. Copeland, et. al., Component Life Estimation: LWR Structural Materials Degradation
Mechanisms, EPRI NP-5461, Project 2643-5 Interim Report, September 1987.
Plants - Heat Exchangers, Contractor Report No. SAND93-7070; UC-523, June 1994.
8. W. H. Ailor, Atmospheric Corrosion, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986.
9. D. J. DePaul, ed., Corrosion and Wear Handbook for Water Cooled Reactors, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1957.
Plants - Tanks and Pools, Contractor Report No. SAND96-0343; UC-523, 1996.
11. R. Nickell, M. A. Rinckel, Evaluation of Thermal Aging Embrittlement for Cast Austenitic
Stainless Steel Components, TR-106092, Research Project 2643-33, Final Report, March 1996.
12. BWNT Chemical Cleaning - N
2
Procurement Specification, Document No. 51-1203933-04,
BWNT
1
, Lynchburg, VA, December 1993.
13. R. H. Jones, Stress Corrosion Cracking, American Society of Metals, Materials Park, OH, 1992.
14. Handbook of Compressed Gases, Compressed Gas Association, Inc., Copyright 1966, published
by Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
15. Handbook of Air Conditioning System Design, by Carrier Air Conditioning Company,
Copyright 1965, published by McGraw-Hill Book Company.

1

16. EPRI TR-103515-R1, BWR Water Chemistry Guidelines-1996 Revision, EPRI Project 2493,
Project Manager C. J . Wood, Final Report, December 1996.
17. Landes and D. E. McCabe, Toughness of Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipe Welds, Report No.
EPRI NP-4768, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, October 1986.
18. NUREG 1801, Vol. 1, Revision 1, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report
Tabulation of Results, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, September 2005.
19. Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools) Revision 1, EPRI
1002950, J uly 2003.
20. BWR Containments License Renewal Industry Report, Revision 1, EPRI TR-103840,
J uly 1994.
21. Roff, W. J ., Fibres, Plastics, and Rubbers A Handbook of Common Polymers, Academic Press
Inc., New York, 1956.
22. Engineered Materials Handbook: Engineering Plastics, American Society for Metals (ASM)
23. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, American Society of Metals (ASM)
25. Engineered Materials Handbook (Desk Edition), Design and Engineering Properties of
Glasses, American Society of Metals, International, Copyright 2002.
26. Engineered Materials Handbook (Desk Edition), Introduction to Engineering Plastics
Environmental Factors, American Society of Metals, International, Copyright 2002.
27. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, Article
Effect of the Environment on the Performance of Plastics, ASM International, Copyright 2003.
Plastics, Elastomers and Linings, and Fabrics, Fourth Edition, Parts A, B and C, Marcel
Dekker, Copyright 1995.
29. F.L. LaQue and H.R. Cupson, Corrosion Resistance of Metals and Alloys, Rhinehold
Publishing Company, New York, 2
nd
Edition, Copyright 1963.
Appendix E - External Surfaces

The External Surfaces Tool provides a method for identifying the aging effects on external surfaces
of mechanical components manufactured from carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and
copper alloys (brass, bronze, and copper-nickel alloys), nickel-base alloys, stainless steel, and
titanium and titanium alloys, as well as from aluminum and aluminum alloys, galvanized steel, and
non-metals (e.g., glass, plastics, elastomers) and insulation. The other Mechanical Tools focus on a
specific material and a particular environment (e.g., stainless steel in a treated water environment).
For the other tools, the environment analyzed was for the internal fluid. The bases and supporting
documentation for the external surfaces of carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and copper
alloys (brass, bronze, copper-nickel alloy), nickel-base alloys, stainless steel, titanium and titanium
alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and galvanized steel components are discussed and
developed in this appendix.

External Surfaces-Appendix E i
CONTENTS

Page
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................... 1-1
2. MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENT....................................................... 2-1
2.1 Materials......................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Stainless Steels........................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Nickel-Base Alloys.................................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.3 Carbon Steel and Low-Alloy Steel ............................................................................ 2-2
2.1.4 Cast Iron..................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.5 Copper and Copper Alloys (Brass, Bronze, and Copper-Nickel).............................. 2-4
2.1.6 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys ............................................................................. 2-4
2.1.7 Titanium and Titanium Alloys................................................................................... 2-4
2.1.8 Galvanized Steel ........................................................................................................ 2-5
2.1.9 Non-Metals ................................................................................................................ 2-5
2.2 Environments ................................................................................................................. 2-7
2.2.1 Indoor (Protected from Weather)............................................................................... 2-7
2.2.2 Outdoor (Exposed to Weather) .................................................................................. 2-7
2.2.3 Buried (Underground/Below Grade) ......................................................................... 2-8
2.2.4 Embedded .................................................................................................................. 2-8
2.2.5 Submerged ................................................................................................................. 2-8
3. AGING EFFECTS ..................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Loss of Material ............................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1.1 General Corrosion...................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Galvanic Corrosion.................................................................................................... 3-4
3.1.3 Crevice Corrosion...................................................................................................... 3-5
3.1.4 Pitting Corrosion........................................................................................................ 3-6
3.1.5 Erosion....................................................................................................................... 3-7
3.1.6 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC) ........................................................ 3-7
3.1.7 Wear and Fretting ...................................................................................................... 3-7
3.1.8 Macroorganisms ........................................................................................................ 3-8
3.1.9 Selective Leaching..................................................................................................... 3-8
3.1.10 Boric Acid Wastage................................................................................................... 3-9
3.2 Cracking ......................................................................................................................... 3-9
3.2.1 Hydrogen Damage ..................................................................................................... 3-9
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking/Intergranular Attack ..................................................... 3-11
3.2.3 Mechanical/Thermal Fatigue................................................................................... 3-12
3.3 Reduction of Fracture Toughness .............................................................................. 3-13
3.3.1 Thermal Aging......................................................................................................... 3-13
3.3.2 Radiation Embrittlement.......................................................................................... 3-13
External Surfaces-Appendix E ii
3.4 Distortion...................................................................................................................... 3-13
3.5 Galvanized Steel........................................................................................................... 3-13
3.6 Non-Metals and Insulation.......................................................................................... 3-14
3.6.1 Glasses ..................................................................................................................... 3-14
3.6.2 Plastics ..................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.6.3 Elastomers................................................................................................................ 3-16
3.6.4 Insulation ................................................................................................................. 3-16
3.7 Summary of Potential Aging Effects.......................................................................... 3-18
3.8 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence................................................................ 3-19
4. FLOW DIAGRAM / SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT.............. 4-1
4.1 Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Overview......................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.3 Tool Description............................................................................................................. 4-3
4.4 GALL Comparison........................................................................................................ 4-5
5. REFERENCES........................................................................................... 5-1

External Surfaces-Appendix E iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1 External Surface Tool................................................................................................. 4-19

External Surfaces-Appendix E iv
LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - External Surfaces............................................................. 4-8

External Surfaces-Appendix E 1-1
1. INTRODUCTION
The External Surfaces Tool provides a method to identify applicable aging effects on the external
surfaces of non-Class 1 mechanical components. Appendices A through D evaluate aging effects for
the internal fluid surfaces for specific materials and environments (e.g., stainless steel in a borated
water environment). This external surface tool considers aging effects resulting from exposure to
the diverse external environments. Since the other tools only analyze fluid environments, there is a
need for a tool that addresses aging of external surfaces.
The External Surfaces Tool may be applied to all the Non-Class 1 mechanical components within
the license renewal scope. This tool focuses on the external surfaces of mechanical fluid system
components (piping, pumps, valves, fittings, etc.). However, these aging effects may be applied to
similar material and environment combinations outside of non-mechanical system components,
provided that all assumptions and considerations discussed herein are verified for the particular
application.
Identified aging effects include loss of material, cracking, change in material properties (e.g.,
reduction of fracture toughness, distortion), and loss of mechanical closure integrity. Bolted
closures are evaluated separately in Appendix F. In addition, cracking due to fatigue should be
addressed using the Fatigue Tool in Appendix H.
The bases and supporting documentation for the aging effects on external surfaces of carbon steels,
low-alloy steels, cast iron, stainless steels, nickel-base alloys, copper and copper alloys, and
aluminum and aluminum alloys are provided in this appendix. Because galvanized steel is widely
used in outdoor environments, a detailed discussion of specific aging effects for galvanized steel is
also included both in the discussions and in the tool logic. For completeness, titanium and titanium
alloys are also included since these materials have found increased usage in nuclear plant service.
Aging effects for the external surfaces of non-metals, such as glass, plastics, and elastomers, are also
described for completeness, since these materials are addressed in the other appendices.
Thermal insulation is installed on mechanical fluid system components in many nuclear plant
systems as a barrier to conserve energy, control heat transfer, control temperature, retard freezing,
provide personnel protection, and/or as a fire barrier [26]. These insulating functions are not
typically credited in nuclear plant safety analyses or for compliance with a regulated event such as
station blackout (SBO), except for fire barriers, wraps and stops, and in cases where insulation is
credited in a plants design basis (e.g., instances where insulating characteristics are a necessary
factor in room heat load determinations). Therefore, except for fire barriers/wraps/stops and in
plant-specific cases where credited with a design basis insulating function, insulation is typically not
required to support any intended function of the mechanical system components to which it is
attached. This tool conservatively includes a discussion on the potential effects of aging on typical
insulating materials since degradation could possibly have an adverse impact on the underlying
metals or on design-basis insulating functions, or could cause the insulation to become loose and
interfere with other intended functions.

This External Surfaces Tool provides the logic and considerations to identify the applicable aging
effects on external surfaces for non-Class 1 mechanical components. The tool may also be applied
to the internal surfaces of non-Class 1 mechanical components in ambient air environments, such as
ventilation systems, as a complement or supplement for Appendix D. The materials addressed in
this tool are discussed in Section 2.1 and the environments are described in Section 2.2.
2.1 Materials
metals, (2) nickel-base alloys, including nickel-base alloy weld metal, (3) carbon steels and low-
alloy steels, (4) aluminum and aluminum alloys, (5) cast iron, (6) copper and copper alloys (brass,
bronze, and copper-nickel), (7) galvanized steel, and (8) non-metals such as glass, plastics, and
elastomers.
The stainless steels discussed in this tool are divided into the following categories: (1) wrought
stainless steels, (2) cast stainless steels, and (3) weld metals. Each is discussed below.
martensitic, (4) precipitation hardening, and (5) duplex stainless steels. Definitions of the
aforementioned groups of stainless steels are provided in Reference 11 and are not repeated here.
Martensitic and precipitation hardening stainless steels are typically used for bolting and are not
addressed in this tool. Bolted closures are addressed in Appendix F.
The cast stainless steels addressed in the External Surfaces Tool all contain ferrite in an austenitic
matrix (i.e., CF series) and are commonly known as cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS). Typical
alloys used in nuclear applications include CF-8 (and CF-8A) and CF-8M which are cast
counterparts of wrought Types 304 and 316, respectively. Other castings include CF-3 and CF-3M
which are cast counterparts of Types 304L and 316L, respectively. Alloys CF-3M and CF-8M are
modifications of CF-3 and CF-8 containing 2% to 3% molybdenum and slightly higher nickel
content to enhance resistance to corrosion and pitting. CF-8A is a modification to CF-8 in that a
controlled amount of ferrite imparts higher tensile properties.
wrought stainless steels include SMAW, SAW, GMAW, gas tungsten-arc welding (GTAW), and

electroslag [11]. The weld metal is assumed to be equivalent to the wrought austenitic stainless
steels with respect to the discussions of loss of material and resistance to cracking (initiation) in
Section 3.0. Higher strength of the weld metal results in enhanced load bearing capacity compared
to base metal; lower toughness of the weld metal may result in a reduced ability to support structural
loads if the weld metal cracks. The strength and toughness of non-flux welds, such as GMAW and
GTAW, were shown to be similar to the surrounding base metal.
alloys such as Alloy 600 and Alloy 690. These materials are used primarily for their oxidation
resistance and strength at elevated temperatures. The applications are typically restricted to the
reactor coolant system (e.g., reactor vessel CRDM nozzles), but may also be found in selected non-
Class 1 components such as the core flood tanks. In addition, Alloy 600 may also be used in
fasteners, which are discussed in Appendix F.
components to carbon or alloy steel vessels in the reactor coolant system. In addition, Alloy 52 and
Alloy 152 are typical filler metals used to join Alloy 690 components to carbon or alloy steel vessels
in the reactor coolant system.
corrosive resistance is not required and is the material of choice for pumps, valves, tanks, and
fittings in most plant water, air, and gas systems. The term carbon steel as used in the aging
evaluation applies to all carbon and low-alloy steels.
2.1.4 Cast Iron
good retention of strength and hardness at elevated temperature, but they are most often used for
their excellent resistance to wear and abrasion. Gray cast iron has several unique properties that are
derived from the existence of flake graphite in the microstructure. Gray iron can be machined easily
at hardnesses conducive to good wear resistance. It has outstanding properties for applications
involving vibrational damping or moderate thermal shock. Ductile cast iron is similar to gray iron in
composition, but during casting of ductile iron, magnesium and cerium are added to the molten iron
to give the final product higher strength and ductility. Malleable iron has similar properties to
ductile iron, however, it is more expensive to manufacture and is only used for thin section castings,
and for parts requiring maximum machinability or where a high modulus of elasticity is required.

This External Surfaces Tool evaluates only the more widely used white, gray, and ductile cast iron
alloys. Although comprising three general categories, various alloying elements can be and are
added to cast iron alloys to promote an array of hardness, corrosion resistance, heat resistance, and
abrasion resistance properties [11].
White Cast Iron
Gray Cast Iron
Ductile Cast Iron
graphite spheres [5, 11]. Nickel, chromium, and/or copper can be added to improve material
strength and hardenability properties. Larger amounts of silicon, chromium, nickel, or copper can
also be added for improved resistance to corrosion or for high-temperature applications [5].
Cement-lined ductile iron is typically used for buried piping that is exposed to raw water, as
described in Appendix B.
Alloy Cast Irons
of some of the most common cast iron alloys is included in Appendix A of this document, which
provides insight for the occasional application that may be encountered during plant evaluations.
These iron alloys are but a few of the many diverse iron alloys available. However, due to the
specialized nature of the alloys, the availability and the cost, they have a very limited application at
most plants.

Bronze and brass are copper alloys using predominantly copper, tin, and zinc with various other
alloying agents present in differing amounts. Brass is an alloy of copper and zinc with other metals
in varying lesser amounts. Bronze is any of various alloys of copper and tin, sometimes with traces
of other metals. Other copper alloys, most notably copper-nickel alloys, are used in other
applications.
Brass and bronze products are available in both cast and wrought product forms with most alloy
and silicon brasses/bronzes are used where higher strength alloys are required. Various alloys of
brass and bronze are used in a number of applications including fire protection sprinkler systems,
compressed air, and instrument air systems.
Aluminum and its alloys have limited use in nuclear plant applications. However, due to its high
resistance to corrosion in atmospheric environments, in fresh and salt water, and in many chemicals
and their solutions, it can be found in various applications. Typical applications of aluminum at
nuclear plants are in various instruments in gas and fluid systems. Aluminum and aluminum alloys
may also have limited use as ductwork in air supply systems. Aluminum and aluminum alloys can
also be used in the housings of fans and heaters.
2.1.7 Titanium and Titanium Alloys
Titanium alloys were originally developed in the early 1950s for aerospace applications due to their
high strength to density ratios. However, the excellent corrosion resistance properties of titanium,
specifically in chloride containing fluids, have led to widespread use in industrial applications,
including the nuclear industry. The corrosion resistance of titanium is a result of the formation of a
continuous, stable, highly adherent protective oxide layer on the metal surface. The metal itself is
very reactive, with a high affinity for oxygen, and reforms damage to this layer instantaneously [24].
The most commonly used grades of titanium in industrial applications include unalloyed titanium
(ASTM grades 1-4) and alloys comprised of varying amounts of palladium, molybdenum, nickel,
aluminum, and valladium (ATSM grades 7, 12, 9, and 5). Varying the alloy compositions gives
slight differences in corrosion protection from one alloy to another, often at a higher cost. Within
nuclear plants, titanium and titanium alloys are utilized in heat exchanger tubing and piping exposed
to seawater, among other applications.
The oxide film on titanium and titanium alloys provides an effective barrier to attack by most gases
in wet or dry conditions, including oxygen, nitrogen, NH
3
CO
2
, CO, and H
2
S. This protection
extends to temperatures in excess of 300F. The outstanding resistance of titanium and titanium
alloys to rural, marine, and urban atmospheric exposure has been documented [24].

2.1.8 Galvanized Steel
Galvanized steel is produced by taking steel sheets and coating them with zinc or iron-zinc alloys.
The corrosion resistance of the galvanized steel is directly proportional to the amount of zinc in the
coating. The metallic zinc is applied to iron and steel by one of three processes: hot dip galvanizing,
electro-galvanizing, or zinc spraying. A majority of the galvanized steel sheet metal is produced by
the hot dip process [11, p. 4-26]. The hot dip process is one in which an adherent protective coating
of zinc and iron-zinc alloys is applied by immersing the steel in a bath of molten zinc. This process
utilizes a series of layers, with each successive layer containing a higher concentration of zinc. This
produces a gradual transition through the coating with no discrete line of demarcation.
Galvanized steel is used where corrosion resistance in an atmospheric environment is required. The
relatively low production cost and appearance make galvanized steel an ideal choice for ducts and
associated ventilation components [11, pp. 4-26, 4-94]. Galvanized carbon steel is widely used, and
because of its potential impact (under certain conditions) on the base material, is addressed
separately in Section 3.5.
2.1.9 Non-Metals
Glasses
There are a wide variety of glass compositions with modifiers, fluxes, and stabilizers added to obtain
various properties, including corrosion resistance [5]. No definitive instances of glass failure due to
an aging effect have been recorded in industry operating experience searches. Also, the external
surfaces of glass components are not exposed to hydrofluoric acids or caustics or hot water.
Plastics
pipe, it is rigid and resists abrasion, as well as being chemically resistant, especially to halogens. It
is impervious to deionized water which can cause organic and inorganic particulates to leach from
PVC. PVDF is highly corrosion resistant and can withstand years of in-ground exposure to moisture
and chemicals [30].

acceptability for the use of thermoplastics within a given environment is a design driven criteria.
Once the appropriate material is chosen, the system will have no aging effects.
Elastomers
used in nuclear plants in various capacities, such as joint sealants, flexible connections, and moisture
barriers. The outstanding characteristic of rubber and elastomers is resilience or low modulus of
elasticity. Flexibility accounts for most applications. However, chemical and abrasion resistance,
and good insulating qualities, result in many corrosion applications. Generally speaking, the natural
rubbers have better mechanical properties than the synthetic or artificial rubbers (e.g., neoprene), but
the synthetics have better corrosion resistance [5]. For example, natural rubbers are degraded by
ozone and sunlight, whereas synthetic rubbers are not affected by ozone and are typically much
more resistant to sunlight (or other forms of ultraviolet radiation) [5 and 25].
Insulation
The characteristics of thermal insulation are mainly determined by its composition. For that reason,
the major types of insulation include fibrous, granular, cellular, and reflective. Inorganic fibers may
be glass, rock wool, slag wool, alumina silica, asbestos, or carbon. Granular insulation is generally
calcium silicate. Many mass insulations (e.g., fibrous, granular, or cellular types in rigid, semi-rigid,
flexible, blanket/batt, cement, and mastic forms) are produced using two or more of the types listed
above to obtain the desired properties. Reflective insulation systems are in most instances made of
aluminum or stainless steel. Securements for insulation include wire, straps, etc. that are typically
metal, depending on the chemical atmospheric conditions and the metal/location of the component
to which it is affixed. Fasteners may be adhesives or stainless steel skewers, pins, and/or clips. A
galvanized wire netting or expanded metal lath may also be used as a reinforcement [26].
The types of insulation typically in use for nuclear power plant systems include fibrous (e.g.,
fiberglass, mechanically bonded glass fiber blanket), granular/cellular (e.g., calcium silicate or
asbestos), and reflective (e.g., MIRROR). Kaowool brand and other fire wrap/stop insulation
materials are also used as fire barriers in nuclear plant service. Glass fiber for insulation is usually a
pure glass fiber with various types of binders that will absorb and wick water and has a maximum
service temperature of 450F. Calcium silicate is a cementitious mixture that readily absorbs and
wicks water, with a maximum service temperature of 1200F [24]. Reflective insulation is
constructed of layers of aluminum or stainless steel panels with air between.

2.2 Environments
The external surfaces of non-Class 1 mechanical system components are exposed to environmental
conditions during normal plant operation that may be divided into the following general categories:
1. Indoor (protected from weather)
2. Outdoor (exposed to weather)
3. Buried (underground/below grade)
4. Embedded (encased in concrete)
5. Submerged (also in a splash zone or continuously wetted)
2.2.1 Indoor (Protected from Weather)
Indoor environments are protected from weather but may include ambient temperatures up to 150F
and various levels of relative humidity (up to 100 percent), depending on whether the atmosphere in
a particular building/facility/structure is controlled (air-conditioned). Components inside buildings
and facilities can be exposed to some amount of moisture based on relative humidity and to wetted
locations (e.g., due to leakage, condensation, etc.), as well as to some neutron and gamma radiation.
The external surfaces of components in systems with lower than ambient internal fluid temperatures
(e.g., Chilled Water, Service Water, etc.) are expected to be intermittently or frequently wetted due
to condensation, whereas components in high temperature systems (e.g., Main Steam, Feedwater,
etc.) are expected to have external surface temperatures >212F which precludes moisture
accumulation. Components in indoor locations may also be exposed to alternate wetting and drying
due to leakage from plant fluid systems (e.g., boric acid from PWR borated water systems) that
could result in a concentration of contaminants in wetted locations.
Components located indoors may also temporarily be in contact with aggressive chemicals resulting
from accidental spills. However, the aging effects that could result from this temporary exposure
are considered rare and event driven and as such are not considered a normal condition of the
environment that requires evaluation. In addition, spills are normally addressed in a expedited
manner such that aging effects would not occur.
2.2.2 Outdoor (Exposed to Weather)
Components located outdoors are exposed to atmospheric conditions and weather with temperatures
generally ranging from -15F to 115F, relative humidity up to 100 percent, and negligible radiation
levels. Furthermore, outdoor environments may be classified as industrial, marine (seashore), or
rural and may contain airborne contaminants (corrosive chemicals) such as halides, sulfates, ozone,
and other aggressive substances (e.g., acid rain, sulfur dioxide, chlorine gases, sulfur gases in areas
near major industrial plants, pesticides, dust or other crop treatments in rural areas) that can
influence the nature, rate, and severity of corrosion.

Depending on the specific equipment location and operating conditions, frequent wetting or
alternate wetting and drying can occur. Outdoor equipment is typically exposed to alternate wetting
and drying that can concentrate contaminants. For example, salt water (i.e., sea or brackish water
spray or where it is used as a deicing agent) is slightly alkaline and a good electrolyte with a high
chloride content. Thus, salt air can aggressively attack most steels and metal alloys in applicable
locations.
Components located in trenches are considered to be exposed to an outdoor (exposed to weather)
environment even though located below grade, for the purposes of this tool (e.g., aging effect
identification).
2.2.3 Buried (Underground/Below Grade)
Natural soils have variable characteristics and properties including moisture, pH (alkalinity or
acidity), permeability of water and air (compactness or texture), oxygen, salts, stray currents, and
biological organisms that can affect the electrical resistance of the soil. Depending on the particular
site groundwater table levels, buried components may also be exposed to chemicals in the
groundwater. The groundwater chemistry may be acidic or contain chlorides and sulfates that can
play a major role in the determination of the degradation of below-grade components.
2.2.4 Embedded
Non-Class 1 mechanical piping components may be routed through concrete floors, slabs, or walls.
The external surfaces of these components are firmly encased in the concrete of the floor, slab, or
wall. Similar to structural reinforcing steel [25], the external surfaces of such piping components
are embedded and the impact of a concrete environment on aging effects must be addressed. For
non-Class 1 mechanical piping components that simply pass through a concrete floor or wall (e.g.,
from one room or elevation to another), the indoor environment, described in Section 2.2.1, is the
more limiting environment and impact of concrete on aging effects need not be addressed.
2.2.5 Submerged
Some of the external surfaces under consideration will be subjected to a completely submerged
environment. These conditions are commonplace in intake structures and piping entering the plant
from the raw water sources or in treated water pools (e.g., BWR suppression chambers). Although
not completely submerged, some equipment is located in what is called a splash zone. This
location is typically adjacent to a raw water source such as a lake or ocean where either a continuous
wetting or splashing of a component due to wind, surf, waves, etc. provides an environment not
unlike that of a fully submerged component. Piping and supports within the torus of older BWRs
also fall into splash zones. The environment for submerged or continuously wetted equipment is
considered to be a raw or treated water environment for the purposes of this tool.

3. AGING EFFECTS
This document addresses the aging effects resulting from a variety of aging mechanisms. Where
specific mechanisms are not applicable under the environmental and material conditions covered by
the tool, reasoning is provided for a not applicable determination. For those mechanisms that are
applicable for the equipment covered by this tool, a discussion of the conditions necessary for the
mechanism is included. Many degradation mechanisms are covered in this tool. However, the aging
effects resulting from these mechanisms in indoor, outdoor, and buried environments can be
included in four categories: 1) loss of material, 2) cracking, 3) reduction of fracture toughness, and
4) distortion. These categories are addressed in the following subsections.
For the identification of applicable aging effects of submerged, in a splash zone, or continuously
wetted components, the user should use the Treated Water Tool (Appendix A) or Raw Water Tool
(Appendix B) of this report as appropriate.
The high alkalinity of concrete (pH >12.5) provides an environment that protects embedded steel
from corrosion/degradation. However, when the pH is reduced (pH <11.5) by the intrusion of
aggressive ions (e.g., chlorides >500 ppm), corrosion can occur. A reduced pH could be caused by
leaching of alkaline products through cracks, entry of acidic materials, carbonation, contaminated
concrete mix, or moisture intrusion [1, 15]. However, good design and construction practices are
sufficient to preclude embedded steel corrosion. Therefore, corrosion/degradation of embedded
metals is not an applicable aging effect. The user of this tool is referred to EPRI report 1002950,
Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [25] for
additional evaluation of the effects of aging on the concrete which may protect embedded metals.
Aging mechanisms that may lead to loss of material on external surfaces include general
(atmospheric) corrosion, galvanic corrosion, crevice corrosion, pitting corrosion, erosion,
microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC), wear and fretting, macroorganisms (biofouling),
selective leaching, and boric acid wastage (PWRs). Loss of material may be visually observed as
material dissolution, corrosion product build-up, and pitting. Loss of material may be uniform or
localized.
neutral or near neutral media, oxygen and moisture are the primary factors for the corrosion of iron
[3]. Generally, when humidity exceeds 70 percent, an invisible film of moisture forms on the
surface of metal, providing an electrolyte. The ratio between humidity and temperature determines
the thickness of the film. The thinner the film, the easier the diffusion of oxygen through the film
that drives the corrosion reaction [24].

A significant effort has been expended by corrosion researchers to understand the factors that
influence outdoor marine and urban atmospheric corrosion. Relative humidity, temperature, sulfur
dioxide, and chloride concentrations are among the more important variables. Outdoor atmospheric
parameters can be significantly altered inside buildings and the work by Ailor [6] and others assume
the indoor level of pollutants is a certain percentage of the outdoor level. Tests show that metals do
corrode indoors; however, the corrosion rate increases rapidly when exposed to an outdoor
environment.
Outdoor atmospheres can be classified as industrial, marine, or rural for the purposes of this tool.
Corrosion is caused by moisture and oxygen but is accelerated by contaminants such as sulfur
compounds and sodium chloride. For example, corrosion of carbon steel on the seacoast is 400 to
500 times greater than in the desert area. Steel specimens 80 feet from the shoreline corroded 12
times faster than those 800 feet away. Sodium chloride is the primary contaminant of concern.
Industrial atmospheres can be 50 to 100 times more corrosive than desert areas [6]. Also, locations
where moisture condenses or accumulates (i.e., wetting) and does not dry out for long periods of
time can cause damage sometimes referred to as sheltered corrosion [6]. For the purposes of this
logic tool, the rate of general corrosion will not be evaluated. However, based on plant-specific
conditions, corrosion rates may be low enough that loss of material due to corrosion is not an
applicable aging effect. Because atmospheric corrosion is an electrolytic process and a very thin
film of water (such as due to humidity) is all that is required [24] and high humidity is common to
interior and exterior plant environments, general corrosion is considered to be an applicable aging
effect for susceptible materials in indoor and outdoor environments unless the surface temperature
would preclude moisture accumulation (>212F).
Carbon steel and cast iron, with and without organic coatings and cathodic protection, are most
common for underground components [5], although other materials (such as stainless steels, copper
and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys) may also be used. Generally poor aeration
and high values of acidity, electrical conductivity, salt content, and moisture content are
characteristics of corrosive soils. Well aerated soils, especially those derived from limestone,
usually are not corrosive. High-resistance soils are generally not very corrosive unless they are
poorly aerated [3].
Stainless Steel
The austenitic Cr-Ni steels of the 18-8 type (18%Cr, 8%Ni) are resistant to corrosion in atmospheric
conditions both for interior and exterior exposures and under conditions of high or low humidity, as
well as when buried. Approximate compositions of Type 304 and Type 316 stainless steel [11] are
shown below.
%C %Mn %Si %Cr %Ni %Mo
Type 304 0.08 2.0 1.0 18-20 8-10.5 ....
Type 316 0.08 2.0 1.0 16-18 10-14 2-3.0
There is much test data on atmospheric corrosion of stainless steel reported in Reference 6. Most of
this data shows that about 12% chromium for industrial and rural areas and about 15% chromium for
marine atmospheres is sufficient to prevent significant corrosion. As identified above, both 304 and

316 stainless steels contain chromium at levels sufficient to provide resistance to corrosion in both
industrial and marine environments. Type 316 is more resistant than type 304 to general corrosion
and pitting, due to the higher nickel and molybdenum content [6].
Nickel-Base Alloys
Nickel-base alloys have very good resistance to atmospheric corrosion. Nickel 200 will become dull
and acquire a thin adherent film. A greater tarnish will result in industrial sulfur-containing
atmospheres than in rural or marine atmospheres. Corrosion of Alloy 400 is negligible in all types
of atmospheres, although a thin gray-green patina will develop. Nickel alloys containing chromium
and iron (e.g., Alloys 600 and 800) also have very good atmospheric corrosion resistance, but may
develop a slight tarnish after prolonged exposure, especially in industrial atmospheres [25]. As
such, general corrosion of the external surfaces of nickel-base alloys is not an applicable aging
mechanism in indoor or outdoor environments.
Carbon Steel, Low-Alloy Steel, and Cast Iron
Carbon steel, as well as low-alloy steel and cast iron are susceptible to general corrosion in the
presence of oxygen and moisture (e.g., from humidity) [5] in both indoor and outdoor environments
although it is expected to be more prevalent in intermittently and frequently wetted locations.
For the purposes of this logic tool, buried carbon steel and cast iron components are considered to be
susceptible to corrosion because of the potential for oxygen levels, moisture content, biological
organisms, and contaminants. Multi-layered coatings and cathodic protection programs may be
evaluated and credited on a plant-specific basis to manage or prevent the effects of corrosion, as
described in Section 4.0 of the main document.
Copper and Copper Alloys
Copper alloys are used when resistance to general corrosion is required. These copper metals are
used in atmospheric, fresh, and salt water in place of other more susceptible metals such as carbon
steel or cast iron [33]. General corrosion of copper and copper alloys results from prolonged contact
with environments in which the corrosion rate is very low. Other substances that cause uniform
thinning at a faster rate include oxidizing acids, sulfur-bearing compounds, NH3, and cyanides.
Copper corrodes at negligible rates in unpolluted air, water, and deaerated non-oxidizing acids [24].
Copper exhibits good resistance to urban, marine, and industrial atmospheres. Copper alloys are
resistant to neutral and slightly alkaline solutions with the exception of those containing ammonia,
which causes stress corrosion (discussed separately) and sometimes rapid general attack [5]. A
patina forms on copper and copper alloys from prolonged exposure, which gives the surface a
weathered appearance. However, due to the protective film which forms on the surface of copper
and copper alloys combined with the very low (negligible) corrosion rates in urban, marine, and
industrial atmospheres, general corrosion is not considered an aging mechanism for copper and
copper alloys in indoor, outdoor, or buried environments.
An exception that requires plant-specific evaluation is the presence of ammonia in the outdoor
environment (e.g., from organic decay), in which case the general attack of copper and copper alloys
may be rapid and result in a loss of function.

Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
Most aluminum alloys have excellent resistance to general (atmospheric) corrosion, often called
weathering, and in many outdoor applications such alloys do not require shelter, protective coatings,
or maintenance. Corrosion by weathering of most aluminum alloys is restricted to mild surface
roughening by shallow pitting, with no general thinning. Such attack is more severe for alloys with
high copper contents, which are seldom used in outdoor applications without protection [24]. In
most indoor atmospheres where pools of contaminated water do not remain in prolonged contact
with aluminum alloys, or where extended contact with moist, porous materials is avoided, corrosion
is not a concern. In particular, aluminum alloys are highly resistant to warm, humid conditions
where there is appreciable moisture condensation so long as contact with porous materials is avoided
[3]. Also, experience has shown that soils, at least to the depth normally used to bury pipelines (and
other components), are non-corrosive to aluminum and aluminum alloys over large areas of North
America [24]. Therefore, loss of material due to general corrosion is not an applicable aging effect
for aluminum and aluminum alloys in indoor, outdoor, or buried environments.
Titanium and Titanium Alloys
The excellent corrosion resistance of titanium metals results from the formation of very stable,
continuous, highly adherent, and protective oxide films on metal surfaces. Because titanium metal
itself is highly reactive and has an extremely high affinity for oxygen, these beneficial surface oxide
films form spontaneously and instantly when fresh metal surfaces are exposed to air and/or moisture.
As such, general corrosion of titanium and titanium alloys is effectively inhibited by exposure to
oxidizing species [24]. Therefore, general corrosion of titanium and titanium alloys is not an
applicable aging mechanism in indoor, outdoor, or buried environments.
Galvanic corrosion occurs when metals with different electrochemical potentials are in contact in the
presence of a corrosive conducting environment (an electrolyte) [5]. Generally the effects of
galvanic corrosion are precluded by design (e.g., isolation to prevent electrolytic connection or using
similar materials). Carbon and low-alloy steels have lower potentials than stainless steels and would
be preferentially attacked in a galvanic couple. The rate of galvanic corrosion is governed by the
relative size of the anode to cathode in the presence of moisture and water. The material with the
lower potential (active) in the galvanic series is the anode and it sacrifices to the cathode (noble). If
the surface area of the anode is appreciably larger than the cathode, then the galvanic corrosion rate
is slow. Conversely, if the surface area of the anode is much smaller than the cathode, then the
galvanic corrosion rate can be very fast.
Galvanic corrosion can occur in the atmosphere, the severity of which depends largely on the type
and amount of moisture present [3, 24]. Generally, when humidity exceeds 70 percent, an invisible
film of moisture forms on the surface of metal, providing an electrolyte. The ratio between humidity
and temperature determines the thickness of the film. In indoor and certain outdoor environments,
the thinness and low conductivity of the electrolyte film limit galvanic effects [24]. A saltwater
environment is more corrosive than a rural atmosphere; therefore, galvanic corrosion will be greater
near the seashore than in a dry rural area [3]. For plants whose operating experience has shown
exposure to an aggressive species such as salt air in marine (seashore) areas or sulfur dioxide, etc. in
industrial areas, the conductivity of the normal atmosphere (humidity, rain, etc.) is increased and

galvanic corrosion may be an applicable aging effect. Frequent or prolonged wetting, such as from
condensation or groundwater, also provide an electrolyte with sufficient conductivity for galvanic
corrosion to occur.
When connected to more cathodic (noble) materials, carbon and low-alloy steels, cast irons, and
aluminum and aluminum alloys are anodic (active) and susceptible to galvanic corrosion in wetted
locations (e.g., condensation) of indoor and outdoor environments, in a buried environment, or in an
outdoor environment where plant operating experience shows aggressive species (e.g., in seashore
or industrial areas).
Copper and copper alloys are in the middle of the galvanic series and are cathodic (noble) to carbon
steel, low-alloy steel, cast iron, or aluminum and aluminum alloys but are anodic (active) to stainless
steel, nickel-base alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys. When connected to more cathodic
(noble) materials, copper and copper alloys are susceptible to galvanic corrosion in wetted locations
(e.g., condensation) of indoor and outdoor environments, in a buried environment, or in an outdoor
environment where plant operating experience shows aggressive species (e.g., in seashore or
industrial areas).
Stainless steel and nickel-base alloys are more corrosion resistant and cathodic (noble) in galvanic
couples and are, therefore, not susceptible to a loss of material because of galvanic corrosion.
The coupling of titanium and titanium alloys with dissimilar metals usually does not accelerate the
corrosion of titanium. However, galvanic couples between titanium and certain active metals and
excessive cathodic charging from impressed current cathodic protection systems are the usual causes
of excessive hydrogen absorption. The effect of this excessive hydrogen absorption is discussed in
Section 3.2.1 below.
Crevice corrosion is intense, localized corrosion within crevices or shielded areas in a component. It
such as gasket surfaces, lap joints, and under bolt heads and is normally associated with a stagnant
or low flow solution (an electrolyte) [5]. Crevice corrosion is strongly dependent on the presence of
dissolved oxygen. Although oxygen depletion in crevices may occur as a result of the corrosion
process, oxygen is still required for the onset of corrosion, and bulk fluid oxygen content or the
presence of contaminants such as chlorides is necessary for the continued dissolution of material in
the crevice [7]. Any surface exposed to atmospheric conditions will be saturated in oxygen above
the threshold levels for crevice corrosion to occur (0.1 ppm) [7].
Typically, atmospheric pollutants and contaminants, both indoors and outdoors, are insufficient to
concentrate and thereby promote crevice corrosion. Crevice corrosion may also occur in severe
marine atmospheres. In contrast to seawater immersion, however, the attack is quite minimal [24].
Alternate wetting and drying is particularly harmful as this leads to a concentration of atmospheric
pollutants and contaminants. Indoors, crevice corrosion is a concern in locations of frequent or
prolonged wetting, or of alternate wetting and drying. Outdoors, precipitation tends to wash a
surface rather than concentrate contaminants and, as such, crevice corrosion may be a concern for
only plants whose operating experience has shown surface exposure to an aggressive species (such

as salt air, sulfur dioxide, and acid rain). Contaminants in groundwater are typically assumed to be
aggressive and to promote crevice corrosion. As such, crevice corrosion is a concern in buried
environments.
Carbon steels, low-alloy steels, cast irons, stainless steels, aluminum and aluminum alloys, and
nickel-base alloys are all susceptible to crevice corrosion to some degree [3, 5]. This form of
corrosion, as the name implies, requires a crevice where contaminants and corrosion products can
concentrate. In addition to oxygen, moisture is required for the mechanism to operate [3, 5]. For
most copper alloys, the location of crevice attack will be outside but immediately adjacent to the
crevice due to the formation of metal ion concentration cells. Classic crevice corrosion resulting
from oxygen depletion and attack within crevices is less common with copper alloys [24].
Titanium alloys generally exhibit superior resistance to crevice corrosion as compared to stainless
steel and nickel-base alloys, but the susceptibility in hot chloride solutions increases significantly
with increasing temperature and decreasing pH. Crevice attack will generally not occur below a
temperature of 160F [24]. Therefore, crevice corrosion of titanium and titanium alloys is not an
applicable aging mechanism except where temperatures are above 160F and plant operating
experience has shown exposure to an aggressive environment (e.g., salt air, acid rain, or sulfur
dioxide), such as in marine (seashore) and industrial areas.
In summary, crevice corrosion is a concern for carbon steel, low-alloy steel, stainless steel,
aluminum and aluminum alloys, copper alloys, nickel-base alloys, and cast iron in wetted locations
of indoor and outdoor environments, and in a buried environment; crevice corrosion may be a
concern in outdoor environments when plant operating experience has shown an aggressive
environment such as salt air, acid rain, or sulfur dioxide (e.g., in marine (seashore) or industrial
areas). Crevice corrosion of titanium and titanium alloys is not a concern except in outdoor
environments when the temperature is >160F and plant operating experience has shown an
aggressive environment such as salt air, acid rain, or sulfur dioxide (e.g., in marine (seashore) or
industrial areas).
Pitting corrosion is a corrosion mechanism that is more common with passive materials such as
austenitic stainless steels and aluminum and aluminum alloys than with non-passive materials;
however, all materials of interest are susceptible to pitting corrosion under certain conditions.
Unless cupric, ferric, or mercuric halides are present in the environment, oxygen is required for
pitting initiation. Areas where aggressive species can concentrate are particularly susceptible to
pitting. Most pitting is the result of halide contamination, with chlorides, bromides, and
hypochlorites being prevalent [5]. On the exterior surfaces of the mechanical equipment addressed
by this tool, pitting is a significant aging effect for carbon and low-alloy steels, cast irons, stainless
steels, nickel-base alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys exposed to weather (outdoors) when
plant operating experience has shown a corrosive (aggressive) ambient environment (such as salt air,
acid rain, or sulfur dioxide) in marine (seashore) or industrial areas. While copper alloys are
generally resistant to pitting corrosion, copper zinc alloys with greater than 15% zinc are
susceptible. Aluminum bronze with greater than 8% Al is also susceptible to pitting in stagnant
conditions. Pitting corrosion is not typically a concern for titanium and titanium alloys regardless of

the media because of the protective oxide film and the corresponding anodic pitting potentials that
are very high (>1 V) [24].
Also, any wetted or alternately wetted and dried surfaces tend to concentrate aggressive species and
are prone to pitting corrosion. Environments that are conducive to pitting include, but are not
limited to 1) components exposed to frequent leakage or water pooling, 2) equipment located in the
splash zone, 3) insulated equipment subject to sweating, 4) components where condensation is
normal due to a lower than ambient internal fluid temperature, and 5) buried components, since
groundwater is assumed to be aggressive.
3.1.5 Erosion
Erosion is the loss of material induced by flowing fluid. For external surfaces, this mechanism is
only a concern for submerged equipment. Submerged equipment is addressed in the raw water and
treated water tools (Appendix B and Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools), which consider the
effects of erosion.
Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) is corrosive attack accelerated by microbiological
activity. Although the bacteria can survive between -10 and 212
o
F, this corrosion mechanism
typically occurs at temperatures between 50 and 120
o
F [12]. Microbiological organisms disrupt the
protective oxide layer and produce corrosive substances and deposit solids that accelerate the
electrolytic reactions of corrosive attack, generally in the form of pitting or crevice corrosion. This
aging mechanism is facilitated by stagnant conditions, fouling, internal crevices, contact with
untreated water, and contact with contaminated soils. Nearly all materials of interest can be
affected. In austenitic stainless steels MIC is almost always confined to welds and weld heat
affected zones (HAZ). MIC in carbon and low-alloy steels is usually not isolated to particular
locations as in stainless steels [9, 10]. Any continuously or frequently wetted areas, including damp
soils, should be considered potential MIC susceptible locations.
Wear is the result of relative motion between components. Fretting is the loss of material which
occurs as a result of relative motion between two materials. A repeated removal of the normal
corrosion product surface film and subsequent development of a new film results in a process similar
to flow-accelerated corrosion except under non-flowing conditions. Examples of fretting corrosion
are repeated small displacements between piping and supports as a result of either thermal cycling or
vibration. The result of wear or fretting is localized loss of material at the interface.
All materials addressed in this tool are susceptible to wear or fretting. However, in most instances
during normal plant operations the relative displacements or movement between the external
surfaces of components are small and the resulting loss of material minimal. Instances of significant
wear or fretting are not related to normal aging and are expected to manifest well before the period
of extended operation and be corrected. As such, it is expected that loss of material due to wear or
fretting from normal plant operations is insufficient to result in loss of component function during
the period of extended operation. Therefore, loss of material due to fretting is not an applicable
aging effect for the external surfaces of non-Class 1 components. Loss of material due to wear is not

an applicable aging effect for the external surfaces of non-Class 1 components, except for crane
rails, doors, and elastomers. Crane rails and doors are passive non-Class 1 components that
experience a higher amount of relative motion during normal plant operations and are addressed in
the Structural Tools [25]. Elastomers are also addressed in the Structural Tools and in Section 3.6
below.
3.1.8 Macroorganisms
Aqueous macroorganisms such as barnacles, mussels, clams, and algae are applicable only to
submerged equipment or other components located in the splash zone of a raw water source.
All such equipment should be evaluated using the raw water tool (Appendix B of these Mechanical
Tools).
most common example is the selective removal of zinc in brass alloys (dezincification). Copper-
zinc alloys containing greater than 15% zinc are susceptible to selective leaching, while copper
alloys with a copper content in excess of 85% resist dezincification. Yellow brass (30% zinc and
70% copper) and Muntz metal (40% zinc and 60% copper) are both susceptible to selective
leaching. The addition of small amounts of alloying elements such as tin, phosphorus, arsenic, and
antimony also inhibit dezincification [11, 5]. The addition of 1% tin to brass, for example, decreases
the susceptibility to selective leaching [11]. Naval brass is essentially an inhibited Muntz metal
produced by the addition of 0.75% tin to the 40% zinc and 60% copper compound.
aluminum in a similar manner to the dezincification of brass [5]. This degradation effect has been
noted specifically in acid solutions; however, it was also noted that massive effects occurred where
the solution contained chloride ions [5]. Unless they are inhibited by adding 0.02 to 0.10% arsenic,
aluminum brasses and bronzes should be considered susceptible to selective leaching.
Gray cast iron can also display the effects of leaching particularly in relatively mild environments.
This process initiates with selective leaching of the iron or steel matrix from the graphitic network.
The graphite is cathodic to iron, providing a galvanic cell. The iron is dissolved, leaving a porous
mass consisting of graphite, voids, and rust. If the cast iron is in an environment that corrodes this
metal rapidly (e.g., saltwater), uniform corrosion can occur with a rapid loss of material strength
which can go undetected as the corrosion appears superficial [5].
Selective leaching is a process similar to galvanic corrosion in that an electrolyte is required.
Also similar to galvanic corrosion, the electrolyte that forms on metals in moist air environments
lacks sufficient potential for the mechanism to occur. For plants whose operating experience has
shown exposure to an aggressive species such as salt air in marine (seashore) areas or sulfur dioxide,
acid rain, etc. in industrial areas, the conductivity of the normal atmosphere (humidity, rain, etc.) is
increased and selective leaching may be an applicable aging effect for susceptible materials.
Frequent or prolonged wetting, such as from condensation or groundwater, also provide an
electrolyte with sufficient conductivity for selective leaching to occur.

Therefore, loss of material due to selective leaching is an applicable aging effect for uninhibited
copper alloys with >15 % Zn or >8 % Al and for gray cast iron in locations of prolonged or
frequent wetting in indoor and outdoor environments, in a buried environment, or in an outdoor
environment where plant operating experience shows aggressive species (e.g., in seashore or
industrial areas).
3.1.10 Boric Acid Wastage
As described in Appendix F, Bolted Closures, boric acid corrosion has been identified as an aging
mechanism for the nuclear power industry, specifically for Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs), and
typically requires specific programs/activities for management. Leakage from PWR systems that
contain borated water can result in the concentration of boric acid crystals on the external surface of
components as the borated water evaporates from the external surface. This concentrated boric acid
aggressively attacks the material, resulting in a loss of material by severe wastage [25]. The focus
of the boric acid corrosion issue has been on susceptible bolting and Class 1 component materials
(e.g., reactor vessel heads). However, leakage from plant systems that contain borated water can
also degrade other susceptible materials in a PWR. Leakage from the boiling water reactor (BWR)
Standby Liquid Control system, which contains sodium pentaborate (a mixture of borax and boric
acid), may also concentrate, but the less acidic crystals are not aggressive to metals (such as carbon
steel) as are the boric acid crystals concentrated from leakage of PWR borated water systems.
Components of PWR systems that are located near systems containing borated water, such as
Reactor Coolant, Containment Spray, etc., are susceptible to the accumulation of boric acid crystals
from leakage that can aggressively attack susceptible materials. Only stainless steels and nickel-
base alloys have specific experimental evidence of resistance to concentrated boric acid. There have
been no incidents to show that stainless steels or nickel-base alloys are subject to boric acid
corrosion. Specific experimental results show that wrought stainless steels and high nickel alloys
are not affected by borated water leakage effects [27]. Additionally, resistance of copper and copper
alloys to boric acid as a corrosive media is excellent, with the exception of the high-zinc brasses
(e.g., >15% Zn) [24]. Similar to the resistance of stainless steels and nickel-base alloys,
concentrated boric acid is not known to attack titanium and titanium alloys. As a result, loss of
material by boric acid wastage is not an applicable aging effect for stainless steel or nickel-base
alloy, copper and copper alloy with <15% Zn, and titanium and titanium alloy components.
As such, loss of material by boric acid wastage is an applicable aging effect for carbon and low-
alloy steel, cast iron, copper alloys with >15% Zn, and aluminum and aluminum alloy components
whose external surface is subject to leakage from a PWR borated water system(s). Leakage from the
borated Standby Liquid Control (SLC) system of BWRs will not provide a similar concentration of
boric acid and loss of material by boric acid wastage is not a concern.
3.2 Cracking
degradation mechanisms of decarburization, hydrogen attack, hydrogen blistering, and hydrogen
embrittlement [2, 5]. Decarburization is produced by moist hydrogen at high temperatures and is

extremely slow below 1000C [3], which is well above the temperatures experienced at nuclear
power plants. Hydrogen attack also occurs at temperatures above those experienced at nuclear
power plants, except as addressed in Appendix D with respect to PWR pressurizer gas space.
Hydrogen damage usually manifests itself as hydrogen embrittlement in high strength metals and
hydrogen blistering in low strength steels, alloys, and irons. Corrosion and the application of
cathodic protection, electroplating, and other processes are major sources of hydrogen in metals [5].
Hydrogen blistering has been seen in low strength carbon and low-alloy steels in the temperature
range of 30-300F [8]. Hydrogen blistering is most prevalent in the petroleum industry, occurring in
storage tanks and in refining processes [5]. Blistering occurs predominantly in low strength alloys
(e.g., carbon steel, copper and copper alloys, and some aluminum and aluminum alloys) after they
have been exposed to aggressive corrosive environments (such as H
2
S) or cleaned by pickling.
Another term for hydrogen embrittlement is sulfide stress cracking if the cracking is caused by the
strengths of less than 120 ksi for carbon and low-alloy steels, concern over hydrogen cracking is
alleviated except when the material is temper embrittled [2]. Since the yield strength of most of the
piping and components in nuclear power plant applications is on the order of 30 to 45 ksi, hydrogen
embrittlement is considered not applicable to the external surfaces of carbon and low-alloy steels in
the nuclear power plant applications. The yield strength of even the hardest cast irons is less than
100 ksi, with plain cast irons in the same range as that noted above for the carbon and low-alloy
steel applications and therefore cast irons are not susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement. Copper
and copper alloys are not susceptible to attack by hydrogen unless they contain copper oxide. Only
tough pitch coppers (i.e., copper and copper alloys with small amounts of oxygen) in a reducing
atmosphere are susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement [24]. High-strength aluminum alloys are
susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement with exposure to gaseous hydrogen or to internal hydrogen
from electrochemical charging [24].
In most cases, austenitic stainless steels are immune to hydrogen damage although nickel-base
alloys may be somewhat susceptible [2, 3]. Titanium and titanium alloys suffer hydrogen damage
primarily by hydride-phase formation. Galvanic couples between titanium and certain active metals
and excessive charging from impressed-current cathodic protection systems are the usual cause of
excessive hydrogen absorption. No hydrogen uptake and embrittlement problems occur when a
titanium metal is coupled to fully passive materials in a given environment. These compatible
materials may include other titanium alloys, stainless steels, copper alloys, and nickel-base alloys,
depending on conditions [24].
However, the external surfaces of components in nuclear power plant applications are not exposed
to hydrogen sulfide, or to gaseous H
2
. It is not expected that equipment within the scope of this tool
will experience the corrosive environment necessary for hydrogen blistering or embrittlement, with
the environments of buried fuel oil storage components clarified below. Also, a review of the failure
data for BWR and PWR systems shows no evidence of hydrogen blistering or embrittlement on
external surfaces of nuclear power plant components. Therefore, hydrogen blistering is considered
not applicable to the external surfaces of carbon (and low-alloy) steels, cast iron, aluminum and
aluminum alloys, and copper and copper alloys in nuclear power plant applications. Similarly,
hydrogen embrittlement is considered not applicable to the external surfaces of susceptible

nickel-base alloys, tough pitch coppers and copper alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys in
nuclear plant applications.
As described in Section 3.2.1 of Appendix C, the Oil and Fuel Oil Tool, improper voltage settings
for cathodic protection systems that protect the external surface of fuel storage components that are
buried may produce free hydrogen in the storage tanks, consistent with experience in the petroleum
industry. However, excess hydrogen is not expected to be generated on the external surface and
hydrogen embrittlement is considered not applicable to the external surface of buried components
where a cathodic protection system is utilized.
3.2.2 Stress Corrosion Cracking/Intergranular Attack
Stress corrosion cracking is a mechanism requiring a tensile stress, a corrosive environment, and a
susceptible material in order to occur. Intergranular attack is similar to stress corrosion cracking
except that stress is not necessary for it to proceed. However, due to the typical operating
temperature ranges of environments included in this application, IGA is generally not a concern.
In the case of SCC of carbon and low-alloy steels, the literature shows the mechanism is possible,
citing SCC in aqueous chlorides as the most common form. However, in the discussion of
prevention and control, one of the most reliable methods of preventing SCC of carbon and low-alloy
steels is to select a material with a yield strength of less than 100 ksi [16]. The yield strength of
carbon steels typically used in non-Class 1 systems is on the order of 30-45 ksi. Industry data does
not support a widespread problem of SCC in low strength carbon steels. However, there was one
reported case, suspected to be nitrate induced, of SCC of carbon steel in a treated water system,
which is not an environment included in this appendix but is addressed in Appendix A, Treated
Water. For these reasons, SCC of carbon and low-alloy steels is considered not applicable for this
tool. SCC in higher strength bolting materials is discussed in the Bolted Closure Tool in
Appendix F.
Stainless steels exposed to buried or alternately wetted and dried environments (other than normal
outdoor environments) may be susceptible to cracking in these locations since sufficient aggressive
contaminants may be concentrated to provide an environment conducive to SCC. Submerged
stainless steel material may also be susceptible to SCC; however, the user is advised to evaluate
submerged equipment using the raw water tool (Appendix B of these Mechanical Tools) or treated
water tool (Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools) as appropriate.
SCC of stainless steels exposed to atmospheric conditions and contaminants is considered plausible
only if the material temperature is above 140F. In general, SCC very rarely occurs in austenitic
stainless steels below 140F [18, 24]. Although SCC has been observed in systems at lower
temperatures than this 140F threshold, all of these instances have identified a significant presence
of contaminants (halogens, specifically chlorides) in the failed components. Additionally there does
not appear to be a threshold level of stress for SCC, with the stress level merely dictating the time to
failure. However, if stainless steel is known not to be sensitized, then SCC of the material need not
be considered an applicable aging effect in an atmospheric environment. There is data in Reference
6 indicating that as-welded Types 304 and 316 resisted SCC, which provides an indication that
sensitization does not always lead to SCC. When considering the stainless steel cracking logic, SCC
may be assumed for high carbon content stainless steels such as Type 304 and 316, but not for low
carbon content stainless steels such as Type 304L and 316L. Therefore, SCC of stainless steel is not

a concern in buried or indoor environments but may be a concern in continuously or frequently
wetted locations in outdoor environments if temperatures are >140F, or if plant operating
experience shows exposure to salt air (e.g., seashore areas) or other aggressive species (e.g., sulfur
dioxide or acid rain in industrial areas).
Pure aluminum is not susceptible to SCC; however, aluminum alloys containing more than 12% zinc
or more than 6% magnesium are very susceptible to cracking under mild corrosive environments [5].
Aluminum alloys are susceptible to SCC in air and water vapor environments, particularly in
corrosive environments containing chloride solutions and saltwater. A determination should be
made from plant-specific operating experience if such conditions exist at the plant, and if such
conditions are likely to occur in the future, particularly for plants in marine (seashore) and/or
industrial areas. Therefore, cracking due to stress corrosion is not applicable to aluminum and
aluminum alloys protected from weather (indoor), but is an applicable aging effect for aluminum
and aluminum alloys exposed to weather where operating experience has shown concentrations of
aggressive contaminants (such as saltwater in the atmosphere).
The best known example of stress corrosion cracking of copper alloys is probably the season
cracking of brass, so called due to its similarity to the cracking of seasoned wood. Ammonia (NH
3
)
and ammonium (NH
4
+
) salts are the corrosive substances most often associated with SCC of copper
alloys. These compounds are sometimes present in the atmosphere. Both oxygen and moisture are
necessary for ammonia to be corrosive to copper alloys; carbon dioxide is also thought to contribute
to the process in NH
3
atmospheres. Moisture films on metal surfaces will dissolve significant
quantities of NH
3
, even from atmospheres with low NH
3
concentrations [4, 5, 24]. Brasses
containing less than 15% Zn are highly resistant to SCC, even under severe conditions.
Additionally, brass is susceptible to SCC in moist air containing trace amounts (0.05 to 0.5 vol%) of
sulfur dioxide (SO2) [24]. Bronze and other copper alloys are considerably more resistant to stress
corrosion cracking than the brass (copper-zinc) alloys [4]. An exception is aluminum bronze, which
has demonstrated a susceptibility to SCC in moist ammonia environments. For the purpose of this
tool the bronzes, with the exception of aluminum bronze, are considered immune to stress-corrosion
cracking.
However, the nuclear plant indoor, outdoor, and buried environments addressed by this tool
typically do not contain detectable amounts of ammonia, ammonium salts, or sulfur dioxide. As
such, SCC of copper alloys is not a concern in indoor or buried environments and is also not a
concern in outdoor environments, unless plant-specific operating experience indicates detectable
amounts of ammonia and ammonium compounds (e.g., due to organic decay, bird excreta, or
cleaning solvent) or sulfur dioxide (e.g., in industrial areas). For plants with such operating
experience, SCC of high zinc (>15% Zn) brasses and aluminum bronzes (e.g., >8%Al) are a
concern in moist (e.g., humidity) and wetted locations.
Aging effects of mechanical and thermal fatigue are addressed separately in Appendix H.

3.3.1 Thermal Aging
Thermal embrittlement is a mechanism where the mechanical properties of a material (strength,
ductility, toughness) are affected as a result of prolonged exposure to high temperatures. Carbon
steel, low-alloy steel, wrought austenitic stainless steel, and nickel-base alloys are not susceptible to
thermal embrittlement when exposed to normal nuclear plant operating environments [13, 14, 17,
18, 19]. However, CASS materials are susceptible to thermal embrittlement depending upon
material composition and time at temperature. Castings with high ferrite and high molybdenum
contents are more susceptible to thermal embrittlement than those with lower values.
CASS materials subjected to sustained temperatures below 250C (482F) will not incur a reduction
of room temperature Charpy impact energy below 50 ft-lb for exposure times of approximately
300,000 hours (for CASS with ferrite content of 40%) and approximately 2,500,000 hours (for
CASS with ferrite content of 14%) [Figure 1; Reference 20]. When considering a maximum
exposure time of approximately 420,000 hours over 48 EFPY, a temperature of 482F is
conservatively chosen below which reduction of fracture toughness is not applicable. This threshold
is chosen because (1) the majority of nuclear grade materials are expected to contain a ferrite content
well below 40%, and (2) the 50 ft-lb limit is very conservative when applied to cast austenitic
materialsit is typically applied to ferric reactor vessel materials (e.g., 10 CFR 50 Appendix G).
Since most non-Class 1 external surface temperatures are below the screening threshold of 482F,
CASS materials are not subject to reduction of fracture toughness for the period of extended
operation. Also, CASS materials are not typically used in Main Steam or Feedwater systems where
external surfaces temperatures are high due to the high temperature of the process fluid during
normal plant operations.
Radiation embrittlement can result in a decrease in fracture toughness of metals; however, it requires
a neutron fluence far exceeding neutron exposures of components and systems in the non-Class 1
category [2, 14]. Therefore, radiation embrittlement is considered not applicable.
3.4 Distortion
Distortion may be caused by plastic deformation due to high temperature related phenomena
(e.g., creep). In general, distortion is addressed by the design codes and is not considered an
applicable aging effect. Creep is not a concern for low-alloy steels below 700F, for austenitic alloys
below 1000F, and Ni-base alloys below 1800F [14]. Creep is not a plausible aging mechanism
since the necessary high temperatures do not occur in nuclear plant systems.
3.5 Galvanized Steel
Galvanized steel is carbon steel protected from the environment by coating the external surfaces
with zinc. Zinc is used because of its corrosion resistance in an external environment and because it
provides galvanic protection of the base metal where discontinuities or damage of the coating has

occurred [5]. The zinc corrosion products tend to be alkaline thereby neutralizing normal acidic
moisture that occurs in industrial environments [7].
In the pH range between 6 and 12, zinc undergoes negligible corrosion under most environmental
conditions. When exposed to water, the corrosion resistance of zinc is maintained only in this pH
range. Outside this pH range, the increased corrosion rate significantly reduces the usefulness of
zinc as a protective coating. In an outdoor environment, on buried components, and in a saltwater
environment, the corrosion protection of the zinc coating is enhanced by the buildup of corrosion
products deposited out of solution [5]. These deposits do not occur in distilled water and, as a result,
the corrosion rates in distilled water are significantly higher than in contaminated water.
Temperature affects the corrosion rate of galvanized steel. Several studies indicate that between
140
o
F and 200
o
F, the corrosion products are significantly more conductive than those formed above
or below this temperature band. The corrosion products at 185
o
F were noted to be about 1,000 times
more conductive (a measure of impurities) than those at 75
o
F (in distilled water) [7]. Therefore, the
potential for significant degradation of the zinc coating can occur on wetted surfaces in this
temperature range. For example, corrosion may occur between insulation and galvanized piping if
there is condensation or leakage.
Galvanized carbon steel is also susceptible to the effects of embrittlement at elevated temperatures.
It was originally thought that galvanized steel could be used at temperatures up to the melting point
of zinc (approximately 785
o
F) [8]. More recent studies have indicated the potential for
embrittlement of galvanized steel at temperatures significantly below the melting point of zinc.
Observed crack propagation in galvanized steel is typically intergranular. At lower temperatures,
the time required for failure increases as does the associated minimum required stress level
necessary to cause embrittlement [21].
Based on work discussed in Reference 21, as well as an application upper temperature limit
established by the American Galvanizers Association, embrittlement of galvanized steel should be
considered a plausible aging mechanism if exposed to temperatures above 400
o
F.
3.6 Non-Metals and Insulation
Based on the wide variety of available glasses, plastics, elastomers, and (conservatively) insulation
systems and the corresponding variety of properties and characteristics, proper selection and use of
these materials is a design consideration and is assumed for the purposes of this tool. The effects of
aging on these materials exposed to the same indoor and outdoor environments as the metals
addressed above are evaluated in the following subsections.
3.6.1 Glasses
Because most silicate glasses have a high resistance to corrosion in normal environments, glass is
frequently considered to be an inert substance. Silica is almost insoluble in an aqueous environment
at temperatures below 482F. Acid attack of soda-lime and borosilicate glass compositions is
minimal due to the formation of protective, highly siliceous surface layer, except for hydrofluoric
and phosphoric (at high temperatures) acids [28]. Indoor and outdoor environments do not typically
contain contaminants that could concentrate and chemically attack glass.

Weathering is a term commonly given to the attack of glass surfaces by atmospheric gases and
moisture whereby the surface of the glass becomes dimmed, fogged, and in extreme cases pitted
(high humidity or exposure to alternating cycles of moisture condensation and evaporation can leach
alkalis from the surface that react with water and create a very-high pH environment on the surface
of the glass that can cause the silicate network to dissolve and visible deposits to form) [29]. But
with most common compositions (i.e., soda-lime glasses), increased surface alkalinity and
enhancement of the attack are needed to cause problems. High silica (e.g., >96%), borosilicate, and
aluminoborosilicate glasses are fully resistant to the weathering phenomenon [28]. Since the indoor
and outdoor environments do not contain contaminants that could concentrate and enhance alkaline
attack of glasses, chemical degradation or hydrolysis of glass is not an applicable aging mechanism
in indoor and outdoor environments.
3.6.2 Plastics
The environment can be a severely limiting factor in the selection and use of plastic materials. The
differences between an office and industrial environment are as significant as the differences
between indoor and outdoor exposure, with four critical parameters for proper selection: operating
temperature, stress level, chemical exposure, and adjoining materials [30]. In indoor and outdoor
locations, the temperatures to which the external surfaces of plastics are exposed are dictated by the
ambient conditions in the location and by internal temperatures, with condensation likely in
applications with below-ambient internal fluid temperatures. Stress levels are assumed to be
adequate for degradation since determination of the actual residual, or molded-in, stresses is not
feasible for the purposes of this tool.
The chemical resistance of many engineering plastics is excellent. Plastics are used routinely in
environments in which metals would rapidly fail. However, most plastics have specific weaknesses
in terms of chemical attack. Failure of plastics due to chemical exposure can be classified as
plasticization, chemical reaction, and environmental stress cracking. Plasticization requires
exposure to a fluid with which a given plastic has somewhat similar characteristics, because the fluid
may diffuse into, and dissolve, the plastic. Chemical reactions occur between a plastic and an
environmental substance that lowers molecular weight or otherwise degrades mechanical properties.
Environmental stress cracking is a phenomenon in which a stressed part develops crazing and/or
cracking from exposure to an aggressive substance [30].
Chemical environments can actually degrade a polymer (plastic) by breaking down the polymer
chains and altering the material properties. Certain polymer types are more susceptible than others
to specific degradation mechanisms, which can include hydrolysis, thermal degradation, oxidation,
and photo degradation, but all polymers can be degraded by at least one mechanism. With exposure
to aqueous environments, hydrolytic degradation of susceptible polymers can occur at very slow
rates but can become perceptible at conditions of either low (<4) or high (>10) pH. Thermal
degradation of susceptible polymers (e.g., high molecular weight polymers) can occur upon
exposure to elevated temperatures such as experienced during molding or extrusion operations, but
would be much slower in end-use environments due to the lower temperature. Oxidation may occur
when many polymers are exposed to oxygen-containing environments; however, susceptible
polymers typically have additive stabilizers and antioxidants that will preserve polymer properties at
least until the additives have been consumed. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation can be the source of energy
that will abstract an atom from the polymer backbone and start the oxidation process. Oxidation

initiated by UV radiation will result in eventual loss of properties; although plastics exposed to UV
typically have chemical additives which retard these processes, these additives eventually will be
consumed and the degradation will proceed [31].
Assuming proper selection, the indoor and outdoor environments addressed by this tool do not
typically contain contaminants that could concentrate, or experience elevated temperatures that
could result in plasticization and environmental stress cracking of plastics. Furthermore, polymers
such as PVC and PVDF are resistant to seawater environments up to temperatures of 150F and
270F, respectively. PVDF is also resistant to moist/wet sulfur dioxide up to temperatures of 200F,
whereas Type 1 PVC is resistant to moist/wet sulfur dioxide up to 100F [32].
Conservatively, chemical attack is an applicable aging mechanism for plastics (e.g., PVC, PVDF)
located in outdoor and indoor environments due to exposure to UV radiation (e.g., sunlight,
fluorescent lighting, etc.), ozone or ionizing radiation. Also, for plants whose operating experience
has included exposure to aggressive species such as sulfur dioxide in industrial areas, chemical
attack and environmental stress cracking is an applicable aging mechanism for plastics other than
PVDF located outdoors.
3.6.3 Elastomers
For a complete discussion of the aging effects of typical elastomers used in nuclear plants, the user
of this Tool is referred to Chapter 7 of EPRI report 1002950, Aging Effects for Structures and
Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [25]. While not addressed in EPRI report
1002590, which is focused on sedentary structural components, elastomers in mechanical systems
(e.g., joint seals and flexible connections) may also experience wear as a result of their flexible
nature and the small vibrations and/or movement of rotating components (e.g., fans). As such, loss
of material due to wear of elastomers materials may be a concern. However, this concern is
dependent on the specific elastomer (for which abrasion resistances vary) and condition, and thus
requires plant-specific consideration.
3.6.4 Insulation
For a complete discussion of the aging effects of, and industry experience with, typical cementitious
and fibrous fire barrier (fire wraps and fire stops) insulating materials used in nuclear plants, the user
of this tool is referred to Chapter 6 of EPRI report 1002950, Aging Effects for Structures and
Structural Components (Structural Tools), Revision 1 [25]. For a discussion of the aging effects
with insulation/jacketing for electrical cables and connections used in nuclear plants, the user of this
tool is referred to EPRI report 1003057, License Renewal Electrical Handbook [34]. As described
in Section 2.1.9 of this appendix, reflective insulation systems (e.g., MIRROR) are constructed of
aluminum or stainless steel panels; steel bands and appurtenances are typically used for affixing
insulation systems to piping and components, and some mass insulation systems are fully
encapsulated in metal (aluminum or stainless steel). The aging effects for reflective insulation
systems (e.g., MIRROR) and for mounting bands/straps and appurtenances are the same as those for
the similar materials evaluated in Sections 3.1-3.4 and do not warrant separate evaluation. In
addition to the aging effects evaluated in Sections 3.1-3.4, metal-encapsulated mass insulation
systems are evaluated below.

Degradation of mass insulation systems may become a concern only when (1) that degradation can
result in degradation/failure of the components to which it is affixed, (2) plant-specific credit is
taken for a design-basis insulating (thermal resistance) function in a safety analysis or for
compliance with a regulated event (e.g., ATWS, SBO), and (3) that degradation may cause the
insulation to become loose and interfere with an intended function.
Metals do not corrode because they are covered with insulation, but require contact with water and a
free supply of oxygen or other aggressive species. Thermal insulation received from manufacturers
and distributors is dry, or nearly so, and if it remains dry there is no corrosion problem for the
underlying metals [24]. Furthermore, the mass insulation systems used in nuclear power plants are
typically selected to limit chemical impurities (such as halides, primarily chlorides) that could leach
out of wetted insulation from either the insulating material or the protective
covering/adhesives/sealants and attack the underlying metals [26]. The use of insulation is not
credited, explicitly or implicitly, with precluding the aging effects for underlying metals evaluated in
Sections 3.1 through 3.5. However, the user of this tool should confirm that the requirements for
insulation at their plants preclude contaminants in the insulation that could attack the underlying
metal if wetted.
The thermal resistance characteristics of mass insulation systems are not expected to naturally
degrade over the course of their service life, as proper selection, design, and installation for the
specific service and condition is assumed. However, similar to cementitious or fibrous fire wraps,
aging effects that may result in degradation of insulation, including the thermal resistance
characteristics, are loss of material, cracking, change in material properties, and separation [25].
These effects could also result in loosening of the insulation and its dropping from the piping or
component to which it is affixed and, thereby, interfering with an unrelated intended function.
Mechanical damage of mass insulation systems (e.g., personnel stepping on or impacting it during
maintenance and other activities) is not considered to be a passive aging mechanism, but is event-
driven and is evaluated and corrected as necessary rather than being allowed to continue for
prolonged periods. Unless protective coverings of mass insulation systems are damaged, loss of
insulating material is not a concern. Also, glass, which is similar to fiberglass strands, is evaluated
in Section 3.6.1 for exposure to indoor and outdoor environments with no applicable aging effects.
Other design considerations for mass insulation systems include the expected thermal extraction and
contraction of the insulated metals, shrinkage in insulation for high temperature systems, and
vibration which can result in differential movement of the insulation [26]. As such, cracking and
separation of mass insulation systems are not a concern since the associated mechanisms of
vibration, movement, and shrinkage during normal plant operations are precluded by design.
Mass insulation systems used in nuclear plant applications typically are sealed and include a
combination of insulating material and a weather barrier, vapor barrier, condensate barrier, or
covering for the specific service. Weather barriers may be constructed of metal jackets with suitable
vapor vents [26]. Weather barriers are typically included with the mass insulation systems for warm
or hot equipment [24]. Vapor barriers typically included with mass insulation systems are used to
prevent moisture in the atmosphere, in the form of vapor, from entering insulation installed on
surfaces of components with lower than ambient temperatures and are therefore used in cold and
dual service applications [26]. This outer covering (or barrier) protects mass insulation from the

weather, solar/UV radiation, or atmospheric contaminants, and from mechanical damage but permits
the evaporation of any moisture vapor [26].
Typically, atmospheric pollutants and contaminants, both indoors and outdoors, are insufficient to
concentrate and thereby attack properly designed, selected, and installed weather/vapor barriers or
covering of mass insulation systems. Also, the coverings protect the insulating materials from
exposure to corrosive elements that could change their material properties. Damage to mass
insulation systems is quickly addressed after discovery of corrosive chemical leaks or spills.
Irradiation of insulating materials is a factor in the design and selection of mass insulation systems.
Ultra-violet and infra-red rays and the oxidizing effects of the air may also cause deterioration of
barriers and coverings over time [26]. Also, industrial environments contain some contaminants
(e.g., sulfur dioxide, acid rain, etc.) which may cause reaction with or corrosion of insulation system
barriers or coverings. Likewise, plants located near coast lines will be surrounded by salt-laden air,
which can subject the surfaces of the weather/vapor barriers or covering to corrosion in outdoor
locations. Therefore, degradation of insulation is not an age-related concern, except in outdoor
environments due to exposure to sunlight (UV radiation) and in instances where plant-specific
operating experience has shown exposure to aggressive chemicals such as sulfur dioxide in
industrial areas and salt air in marine (seashore) areas.
Table 4-1 contains a summary of the various aging mechanisms and applicable aging effects
considered for various metals during the development of this tool. Also included are the conditions
necessary for these aging effects to be manifested and the various metals that are susceptible to these
effects. Figure 1 provides a depiction of the corresponding logic and decision points for the various
aging mechanisms that are applicable for external surfaces in indoor air, outdoor air, and buried
environments.
One significant point in the mechanism and effects relationship is that loss of material due to general
corrosion is uniform, whereas it is localized for the other corrosion mechanisms. This may be an
important factor in determining the effectiveness of detection and management programs. For
example, with uniform corrosion, wall thinning can lead to gross failure (although the rate is very
slow and usually predictable). With localized loss of material, the material loss is concentrated, with
relatively small material weight loss leading to a through-wall failure (although the rate can be very
fast and unpredictable). Through-wall failures associated with localized corrosion are generally pin-
hole type leaks, allowing time for identification and repair before impairing component or system
function.
Additionally, EPRI report 1002590 [25] addresses the potential aging effects (and mechanisms) for
elastomers, including the conditions necessary for the effects to be manifested. That information is
not duplicated in this tool. However, due to their flexibility, wear of elastomers may be a potential
aging mechanism for elastomers.
Also, degradation, such as cracking or change in material properties, is a potential aging effect for
plastic surfaces (e.g., PVC, PVDF) from exposure to UV radiation (e.g., sunlight, fluorescent

lighting, etc.), ozone, or ionizing radiation, and also for plastics other than PVDF located outdoors at
plants whose operating experience has included exposure to aggressive species such as sulfur
dioxide in industrial areas.
3.8 Applicable NRC Generic Correspondence
The NRC generic correspondence (Circulars, IE Bulletins, Information Notices, and Generic
Letters) was reviewed for correspondence related to the external surfaces of components. Several
entries were found that related to fatigue failures of small bore attached piping and corrosion of
threaded fasteners. One entry was found related to standing water due to condensation affecting
original accident analysis assumptions. Various entries related to the accumulation of boric acid
deposits from system leakage. Thermal and mechanical fatigue correspondence will be discussed in
Appendix H. Correspondence related to boric acid leakage is addressed in Appendix F since bolted
enclosures are the source of most boric acid leakage. However, it is recognized that boric acid
leakage can extend beyond the bolted closure such as at nozzle weld locations caused by stress
corrosion cracking (SCC) or intergranular attack (IGA).
Information Notices
IN 80-05: Chloride Contamination of Safety-related Piping and Components
Bechtel Power Corporation determined at the Wolf Creek Project that a fire retardant coating is
potentially corrosive to stainless steel. Albi Duraspray is used to fireproof exposed structural steel
in some power plants. It does not appear to affect unprimed inorganic zinc coated, or galvanized
steel; however, it may be corrosive to stainless steel, bare aluminum, or copper. The Notice advised
readers to protect all affected material from overspray and droppage of cementitious oxychloride
materials.
IN 85-34: Heat Tracing Contributes to Corrosion Failure of Stainless Steel Piping
In 1984, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station reported seven through-wall cracks in 50 feet of type 304
stainless steel piping. The 1 inch piping was installed in a horizontal position in the post-accident
sampling system. The lines were intended to have a slope for draining, but interface requirements
led to a horizontal line with sagging. The pipe carries gas samples and heat tracing was used to keep
it dry. During evaporation, the chlorides present in the water concentrated where the pipe sagged.
Repeated evaporation led to a buildup of chemicals and eventually caused corrosion of the piping
that was kept hot by the heat tracing. Although this was a case of cracking from the inside out, the
external heat tracing initiated the concentration of chlorides which promoted the stress corrosion
cracking.
IN 02-11: Recent Experience with Degradation of Reactor Pressure Vessel Head
This information notice alerted Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) licensees about findings from
recent inspections and examinations of a degraded reactor pressure vessel head at a site, and also
describes industry operating experience with boric acid corrosion of reactor coolant pressure
boundary components in PWR plants. Several instances of boric acid corrosion that have been
identified are associated with the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) head. The primary effect of boric
acid onto ferritic steel is wastage or general dissolution of the material. The information notice
reiterates the importance of minimizing boric acid leakage, detecting and correcting leaks in a timely

manner, and promptly cleaning any boric acid residue. Related generic communications are also
listed in this information notice, including (descriptions not provided in this tool) Information
Notices 80-27, 82-06, 86-08 (and Supplements), 90-10, 94-63, 96-11, and 01-05, Generic Letters 88-
05 and 97-01, and IE Bulletins 82-02 and 01-01.
IN 02-13: Possible Indicators of Ongoing Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Degradation
This information notice alerted PWR licensees to possible indicators of reactor coolant pressure
boundary degradation. In response to issues regarding wastage of ferritic steel RPV head
components at a site, the NRC issued notices 02-01 and 02-11 (description not provided in this tool)
and sent an augmented inspection team to investigate the degradation. Several possible indicators of
reactor coolant pressure boundary degradation were identified, including unidentified reactor
coolant system (RCS) leakage and containment air cooler and radiation element fouling. In 1998,
increased fouling caused by boron deposits was identified and a flow from the containment air
coolers resulted in boric acid deposits elsewhere within containment, including on service water
piping, stairwells, and other areas of low ventilation. As such, RCS leakage, boron deposits, and
corrosion products in containment air coolers and radiation monitors may indicate degradation of the
reactor coolant pressure boundary.
IN 03-07: Water in the Vent Header/Vent Line Spherical Junctions
This information notice alerted licensees of recent issues involving the pressure suppression
containment system in BWRs with a Mark I containment. During a recent refueling outage at a site,
unanticipated standing water was found inside the vent header/vent line (VH/VL) spherical
junctions (vent system low point or bowl). The weight of this standing water inside the VH/VL
spherical junctions was not included in the generic Mark I containment accident analysis because
the spherical junctions are assumed to remain dry. The source of the water is believed to be
condensation in the relatively cool vent header lines. The original plant design of some Mark I
containments had drain lines from the spherical junctions to the torus. Some of the plants having
these drain lines removed them in the early 1980s to eliminate a potential torus bypass path. The
licensees analysis of the standing water in the spheres concluded that the mass could become
entrained in the initial blowdown and would increase the thrust loads during a LOCA. The
calculated stress level for the VH/VL junction exceeded the original design acceptance criteria
(ASME Service Level A/B), but remained below ASME Service Level C and the higher acceptance
stress level limits for operability (ASME Service Level D).
IN 05-02: Pressure Boundary Leakage Identified on Steam Generator Bowl Drain Welds
This information notice alerted PWR licensees to cracking and leakage indications found on steam
generator bowl drains. Boric acid deposits from pressure boundary leakage in the vicinity of a SG
bowl drain were identified at a site, during bare metal visual examinations of Alloy 600/82/182
components. Further examination, including dye penetrant testing, confirmed that PWSCC had
resulted in cracking of a drain line weld. This finding is consistent with the industry operating
experience, except that no evidence of boric acid corrosion of the ferritic material was identified.
The NRC has issued a number of generic communications related to PWSCC in the reactor coolant
system of PWRs. These generic communications, such as Information Notice 04-11 and Bulletin
03-02, address leakage from various Alloy 600/82/182 components.

4. FLOW DIAGRAM / SUMMARY TABLE DEVELOPMENT
4.1 Assumptions
1. Components that are submerged, in the splash zone of raw or treated water sources, or
continuously wetted other than by condensation, are essentially subjected to a raw or treated
water environment. The external surfaces of these components should be evaluated using
Appendix B and Appendix A of these tools, which consider the aging effects applicable to raw
water and treated water environments, respectively.
2. Oxygen level is a significant parameter in many aging mechanisms. This tool assumes that the
level of oxygen in the atmosphere and surrounding buried components is above the threshold
value to cause corrosive effects.
3. Atmospheric environments contain chemical species including oxygen, halides, sulfates, and
other aggressive corrosive substances that can influence the nature, rate, and severity of
corrosion. However, it is assumed that these contaminants cannot be concentrated to levels that
will promote corrosion unless subjected to factors such as cyclic (wet-dry) condensation,
prolonged durations of contaminated insulation or accidental contamination, or leakage.
Additionally, atmospheric environments in sea coast areas may contain high concentrations
of salt and those in industrial areas may contain high concentrations of sulfur dioxide, acid
rain, etc.
4. The environment surrounding buried equipment usually contains oxygen and other aggressive
species. For the purposes of this tool, the buried path assumes that a component is exposed to
oxygen and chlorides, halides, sulfates, etc.
5. Crevice corrosion requires a crevice (an opening usually a few thousandths of an inch or less in
width) to occur. The logic will assume conservatively that the potential exists for crevices in all
components and systems.
6. Some aging effects are the result of mechanisms that require stresses to operate. It is
unreasonable to expect an evaluator to establish the presence of stresses resulting from the
manufacturing process or post-installation welding for every component under consideration. In
these cases, the logic conservatively assumes that the threshold stress exists for the mechanism
to occur.
7. The stainless steel logic determines SCC to be a plausible aging mechanism in saltwater only
when the material is above 140F. Although it is recognized that SCC may occur at lower
temperatures, this occurs only with high levels of contaminants present, not just atmospheric
conditions.
8. Microorganisms of various types that influence corrosion either directly or indirectly are
assumed to exist for the buried environment and in frequently wetted outdoor environments
(e.g., water pooling/ponding).

9. Coatings and linings are not automatically credited since the techniques for installation and
preservation are varied and plant specific. Each user of this tool must assure that a program is
in place to verify the integrity of the coating.
10. The zinc coating on galvanized steel has demonstrated high rates of corrosion in a distilled
water environment between 140 and 200
o
F. A similar environment can occur when
condensation or leakage from insulated pipe results in a wetted condition between the insulation
and the galvanized material. The tool logic identifies loss of material as a significant aging
effect for galvanized steel under such conditions.
11. Air-conditioning is not automatically credited for humidity control since not all plant
buildings/structures/facilities are air-conditioned and not all HVAC systems are included in the
scope of license renewal. Where control and air-conditioning of an area is credited with
precluding an aging effect (e.g., in the control room and/or switchgear room(s)), each utility
must assure that a program is in place to ensure the integrity of the AC system function.
12. Thermoplastics and insulation systems are assumed to be selected, designed, and installed for
the specific service and conditions.
4.2 Overview
The Mechanical Tools provide a method to identify applicable aging effects for systems and
components which are required to undergo an aging management review in compliance with the
license renewal rule. Utilization of these tools will result in the identification of aging effects for
plant equipment that must be managed during the renewal period. Demonstration of the adequacy of
aging management programs is outside the scope of this tool as described in Section 4.0 of the main
document.
These tools identify potential aging effects and direct the user to areas in the system where these
effects might be preferentially manifested. The previous sections identified numerous aging
mechanisms and their associated aging effects which potentially can occur. This logic tool,
Table 1 and Figure 1, guides the user to determine, based on specific materials, environments, and
operating conditions, whether these effects are applicable. This tool is organized such that
individuals utilizing the tool do not require a detailed knowledge of aging mechanisms or their
effects. The logic does, however, require that the user be familiar with the materials of construction
and the various environments.
Utilization of the tool documents the disposition of aging mechanisms and the resultant aging effects
for the external surfaces of non-Class 1 nuclear plant components. The results identify the effects
which must be managed and can help guide how and where to implement aging management
programs.

Table 1 (added in Revision 3) identifies applicable aging effects, and corresponding mechanisms,
that may require programmatic oversight (management) for the period of extended operation, as well
as the applicability criteria for the occurrence and propagation of the mechanisms. This table
summarizes the information depicted on the corresponding logic diagram (Figure 1) and is
organized alphabetically by material and aging mechanism. The potential aging effects, together
with the detailed mechanism discussions in Section 3.0 and assumptions in Section 4.1 of this
appendix, provides the basis for the development of the air and gas tool described below. The
materials and environments covered by these tools are described in Sections 2.1 and 2.2,
respectively.
Figure 1 contains the logic to evaluate aging effects for the external surfaces of carbon and low-alloy
steels, cast iron, copper and copper alloys, aluminum and aluminum alloys, austenitic stainless
steels, nickel-base alloys, and titanium and titanium alloys that are located indoors (protected from
weather), outdoors (exposed to weather), or are buried (underground). It also contains the logic
where accelerated aging effects for the external surfaces of galvanized steel can be identified.
The lower branch evaluates all external surfaces for loss of material because of wear/fretting,
whether located indoors, outdoors, or buried. The middle branch evaluates the effect of humidity
and moisture. The upper branch includes a temperature threshold of 212F that applies to all
materials, as moisture must be present for corrosion to occur, and evaluates exposure to prolonged
wetting other than humidity (e.g., leakage, condensation, pooling/ponding), as well as the effect of
an aggressive environment such as may be found in industrial and seashore areas. Except for the
effects of general corrosion addressed in the middle branch, aging effects (corrosion rates) for
external surfaces of components are considered to be insignificant unless the surface is subject to
intermittent or frequent wetting (e.g., condensation, leakage, pooling/ponding) other than due to
humidity or where plant operating experience has shown exposure to aggressive atmospheric
environments such as sulfur dioxide in industrial areas and saltwater in marine/seashore areas. The
external surfaces of susceptible materials for PWR components located indoors and subject to
leakage from borated water systems may be significantly corroded by the resulting concentration of
boric acid. Buried components are considered to be wetted and the damp soil to contain some level
of contaminants and microbes. Galvanic corrosion is only applicable to carbon and low-alloy steel,
cast iron, copper and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys in wetted locations whether
indoors, outdoors, or buried or where experience shows an aggressive (e.g., saltwater atmosphere).
The figure evaluates the aging effects/mechanisms that apply to all materials, such as MIC and
wear/fretting, and then separately evaluates in the upper branch the aging effects for stainless steel,
nickel-base alloys, titanium and titanium alloys, and for carbon and low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper
and copper alloys, and aluminum and aluminum alloys.
Stainless Steel, Nickel-Base Alloy, Titanium and Titanium Alloys
The decision blocks in this logic ask whether the external surface is exposed to wetting other than
humidity or to an aggressive environment with temperature less than 212F. These blocks are
intended to remove from further aging consideration all material which is not exposed to a harsh
environment. Surfaces of other materials in sheltered locations and not subject to cyclic wetting and
drying or frequent moisture exposure can be excluded from further consideration. Material in

indoor environments fits this category except in wetted locations. The question of whether a surface
is wetted other than due to humidity includes alternately (cyclic) wetted and dried situations where
aggressive species can concentrate such as for buried components or alternately wetted and dried
conditions where the source fluid could contain contaminants but does not include exposure to only
rain. Alternate wetting and drying resulting from rain has shown a tendency to wash the exterior
surface material rather than concentrate contaminants [6]. Examples of this type of wetting include
insulated components subject to sweating, tanks and components subject to cyclic condensation
when frequently filled from an external source, and chronic leakage areas. Surfaces subjected to a
wetted and/or aggressive atmospheric environment are susceptible to pitting and crevice corrosion,
as well as to SCC (stainless steel), at temperatures >140F. MIC damage is also a concern if the
component is buried or in contact with a raw water source in outdoor locations. The no path
includes stainless steel, nickel-base alloy, and titanium and titanium alloy material subjected to
either indoor or outdoor atmospheric conditions. These materials are not susceptible to pitting,
crevice, or other forms of corrosion/cracking under these conditions unless exposed to an aggressive
atmosphere such as where plant operating experience has shown exposure in industrial and seashore,
particularly saltwater, environments.
Carbon and Low-Alloy Steel, Cast Iron
Both paths of the logic addressing whether a surface is wetted or exposed to an aggressive
environment include carbon and low-alloy steel and cast iron. Carbon and low-alloy steel, and cast
iron are susceptible to general corrosion due to moisture (humidity) and in wetted locations or when
exposed to aggressive environments. Carbon and low-alloy steels and cast iron are also susceptible
to localized corrosion in wetted locations or when exposed to aggressive environments.
Furthermore, gray cast iron is susceptible to selective leaching in wetted locations or when exposed
to an aggressive environment. The logic for wetted surfaces or those exposed to aggressive
environments also asks whether the surface is exposed to leakage from a PWR borated water system
and then separates carbon and low-alloy steels from galvanized steel. As discussed in assumption 3
in Section 4.1 of this tool, the buried environment includes oxygen and other contaminants in the
soil as an aggressive species. For equipment that is not buried, oxygen should not be considered an
aggressive species when answering this logic question. The no path from this block inherently
assumes oxygen is present.
Galvanized Steel
The logic provides galvanized steel decision points to identify aging effects due to degradation of
the zinc coating. Although other paintings and coatings are utilized, the widespread use of
galvanized steel for environmental protection was a factor in including specific logic in this exterior
surface tool. Because this logic addresses the integrity of the galvanized steel, specific aging effects
of the base carbon steel are not included in the galvanized steel paths. The expectation of no
material loss due to general corrosion of the galvanized material does not preclude the necessity for
a program to assure coating integrity. Conditions expected to result in more rapid deterioration of
the coating than anticipated during design require consideration of the effect on the base material. If
depletion of the zinc coating via general corrosion concerns is indicated using the galvanized steel
branch, aging effects for the base material can be identified by following the carbon steel logic when
the coating is no longer intact.

Copper and Copper Alloys, Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
The copper and copper alloys / aluminum and aluminum alloys portion of the logic addresses the
aging effects for these materials in wetted locations or when exposed to aggressive atmospheric
environments. As discussed in Section 3.1.6, these materials are susceptible to MIC attack. Copper
alloys with high zinc and aluminum contents will experience crevice and pitting corrosion in an
aggressive environment. Section 3.1.9 defines the materials susceptible to selective leaching. These
materials include high content copper alloys (zinc>15% and aluminum>8%) that are not inhibited
(by the addition of small amounts of tin, arsenic, etc.) and are included in the logic. In addition,
aluminum alloys with >12% zinc or >6% magnesium are susceptible to stress corrosion cracking in
wetted locations that concentrate contaminants and when exposed to aggressive atmospheric
environments.
4.4 GALL Comparison
The information contained in Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII of Volume 2 of NUREG-1801,
Revision 1, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report Tabulation of Results, identifies
material, environment(s), aging effects (and associated mechanisms) typically requiring
management for license renewal applicants, and the suggested aging management program (AMP)
for various mechanical components. GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for
environments addressed by this tool. The identification and evaluation of aging management
programs (AMPs) is outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific basis,
as described in Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Table 4-
1, with the following component, material, environment, aging effect, and aging mechanism
considerations.
GALL Chapter VII includes items for structural components such as crane rails/girders (VII.B-1 and
VII.B-3), fire barrier penetration seals/doors/barriers (VII.G-1, VII.G-2, VII.G-3, VII.G-4, VII.G-28,
VII.G-29, VII.G-30, and VII.G-31), and structural steel (VII.A1-1) that are not addressed in this
tool. The user of this tool is referred to the Structural Tools [25] for evaluation of the aging effects
for these components. Component identification is also outside the scope of this tool.
The materials for the pertinent items in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the
materials addressed by this tool, which are described in Section 2.1. Stainless steel is referred to as
stainless steel and nickel-base alloys are referred to as nickel alloy in the GALL items for
environments addressed by this tool. Carbon or low-alloy steel is referred to as steel or steel
(with or without coating or wrapping) in the GALL items for environments addressed by this tool.
Coatings are not credited with precluding aging effects in this tool. Cast iron is included with
steel in the GALL for environments addressed by this tool, except where gray cast iron is
identified in soil environments. Copper and copper alloys are referred to as copper alloy, as
copper alloy <15% Zn, and as copper alloy >15% Zn for various environments and aging
effects addressed by this tool. Aluminum and aluminum alloys are referred to as aluminum in the
GALL items for environments addressed by this tool. Items are included in the GALL for
galvanized steel in environments addressed by this tool. The non-metals that are listed in the GALL
are referred to as glass and elastomers. Plastics and insulation are not listed in the GALL for
the environments addressed by this tool.

The following GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII environments for mechanical components are
bounded by the environments addressed in this tool, which are described in Section 2.2:
GALL Environments Appendix E Environments
Air indoor controlled (external)
Air indoor uncontrolled
Air indoor uncontrolled (external)
Air with borated water leakage
Air with leaking secondary-side water
and/or steam
Air with reactor coolant leakage
Condensation
Condensation (external)
Indoor air (protected from weather)
Air outdoor (external)
Condensation
Outdoor air (exposed to weather)
Concrete Embedded
Soil Buried

The GALL items (IV.E-4, IV.E-6, V.F-14, V.F-17, VII.J -17, VII.J -21, VIII.I-11, and VIII.I-14) that
address steel and stainless steel in concrete concur with the conclusions of Section 2.2.4 of this
tool with respect to there being no aging effects requiring management (applicable aging effects) for
embedded surfaces. The GALL items for steel, galvanized steel, and aluminum exposed to
controlled indoor air environments (V.F-1, V.F-16, VII.J -1, VII.J -20, VIII.I-13) concur with the
consideration that there are typically no applicable aging effects in temperature/humidity controlled
environments. Controlled indoor environments include areas such as the control room envelope,
where conditioning and/or control is an intended function of the corresponding HVAC system(s).
The GALL items (V.F-6, VII.J -10, and VIII.I-5) that address glass in (uncontrolled) air concur with
the conclusions of Section 3.6.1 of this tool with respect to there being no aging effects requiring
management (applicable aging effects) for the external surfaces of glass components. Similarly, a
GALL Chapter V item (V.B-4) cites hardening and loss of strength due to elastomer degradation in
uncontrolled air without describing the relevant conditions for elastomer degradation. This GALL
item concurs with Section 3.6.3 of this tool, which references EPRI report 1002590 [25] for
discussion of the applicable aging effects for elastomers, and includes a description of the relevant
conditions for the degradation of elastomers, such as temperature, radiation, sunlight, and ozone
(natural rubbers). Additionally, certain GALL Chapter VII items (VII.F1-5, VII.F2-5, VII.F3-5, and
VII.F4-4) cite loss of material due to wear as an aging effect requiring management for elastomer
seals and components in air, which is more conservative than the discussion in Section 3.6.3 of this
tool.

The GALL does not evaluate mechanisms separately, as is done in Section 3.0 of this tool. The
aging effect cited in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII for the external surface of metals includes
loss of material, with the following mechanism or groupings of mechanisms depending on material
susceptibility and/or environment:
Boric acid corrosion (steel, aluminum, and copper alloys >15% Zn)
Erosion (of PWR steam generator secondary side external surfaces due to leakage)
General corrosion (of steel exposed to indoor air, outdoor air, and condensation)
General, pitting, and crevice corrosion (of steel exposed to outdoor air)
General, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion (of steel with or without
wrapping/coating exposed to soil)
Pitting and crevice corrosion (of aluminum, copper alloy, or stainless steel exposed to soil or
condensation)
Selective leaching (of gray cast iron exposed to soil)
The GALL items for the above environments do not identify galvanic corrosion of external surfaces,
whereas per Section 3.1.2, galvanic corrosion is evaluated in this tool and is applicable to carbon
and low-alloy steel, cast iron, copper and copper alloys, and aluminum/aluminum alloys in wetted or
buried locations, i.e., in the presence of an electrolyte, if connected to a more cathodic (noble) metal
in the galvanic series. The GALL also does not identify cracking, due to SCC, of external surfaces,
whereas it is evaluated in this tool, in Section 3.2.2, for aluminum and aluminum alloys, certain
copper alloys, and stainless steel.
The GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items that identify aging effects for closure bolting, and
heat exchangers, except the external surfaces of shells/channels, are addressed separately in
Appendix F and Appendix G, respectively. Likewise, GALL items for fatigue are evaluated
separately in Appendix H and are not addressed in this tool.

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary - External Surfaces
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
All Metals Loss of
Material / MIC
1. Temperature <212F and pH <10.5
and
2a. Surface is buried
or
2b. Surface is subject to prolonged wetting other than
humidity in outdoor locations (e.g., from
condensation, leakage, ponding/pooling)

Note: Intermittently or frequently wetted locations
inside buildings do not typically promote MIC on
external surfaces unless there has been an intrusion of
groundwater or other aggressive contaminants (e.g.,
in industrial or marine areas). Any such instances are
not typical and require plant-specific evaluation.
V.B-9,
V.D1-26,
V.D2-27
VII.C1-16,
VII.C1-18,
VII.C3-8,
VII.C3-9,
VII.G-20,
VII.H1-7,
VII.H1-9,
VII.H2-19,
VII.G-25
VIII.E-1,
VIII.E-28,
VIII.G-1,
VIII.G-31
No Sections 2, 3.1.6
Specified GALL items also list general (steel),
crevice, and pitting corrosion of steel (with or
without coatings/wrappings) that is exposed to
soil (buried), or list only pitting and crevice for
stainless steel that is exposed to soil (buried),
without indication as to why one material is
resistant when another is not. See discussions
below.
GALL does not include items for MIC in outdoor
air environments. Furthermore, GALL items for
stainless steel exposed to soil (V.D1-26, V.D2-
27, VII.C1-16, VII.C3-8, VII.G-20, VII.H1-7,
VII.H2-19, VIII.E-28, and VIII.G-31) do not list
MIC with crevice and pitting corrosion, although
the material is susceptible if buried.
No other materials are identified as being exposed
to soil (buried) in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, or
VIII.
Aluminum
and
Aluminum
Alloys
Loss of
Material /
Boric Acid
Wastage
1. Surface is exposed to leakage from PWR borated
water systems
V.D2-18
VII.A3-4,
VII.E1-10
Yes
Sections 2.1.6, 3.1.10
Specified GALL items list boric acid corrosion of
aluminum in air with borated water leakage.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of
Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
2a. Surface is buried or exposed to a concentration of
contaminants
1

or
2b. Surface is exposed to an aggressive environment
in outdoor locations
2

V.F-2
VII.F1-14,
VII.F2-12,
VII.F3-14,
VII.F4-10,
VII.J -1
Yes Sections 2.1.6, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.5
GALL items V.F-2 and VII.J -1 indicate that no
aging effects require management for aluminum
exposed to uncontrolled indoor air.
Remaining specified GALL items cite pitting and
crevice corrosion of aluminum exposed to
condensation. GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and
VIII do not include items for aluminum in an
outdoor or buried environment.
Aluminum
and
Aluminum
Alloys
(Contd)
Loss of
Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
2. Component is connected to a more cathodic
(noble) metal in the galvanic series
and
contaminants
1
, which provide an electrolyte
or
2
, which provide an
electrolyte
include items for galvanic corrosion of external
component surfaces, only for internal surfaces of
copper alloy exposed to treated water (Appendix
A) and for heat exchanger components exposed to
closed-cycle cooling water or raw water
(Appendix G).

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Aluminum
and
Aluminum
Alloys
(Contd)
Cracking /
SCC
and
2. Alloy has >12% Zn or >6% Mg
and
contaminants
1

or
2

include items for cracking of aluminum (due to
SCC), regardless of the environment.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel and
Cast Iron
Loss of
Material /
Boric Acid
Wastage
water systems
V.A-3,
V.A-4,
V.D1-1,
V.E-9
VII.A3-2,
VII.E1-1,
VII.I-10
VIII.H-9
Specified GALL items list boric acid corrosion of
steel, including cast iron, exposed to air with
borated water leakage.
GALL item V.A-3 also lists general, pitting, and
crevice corrosion of the internal surface of steel
encapsulation components. Boric acid corrosion
of these internal surfaces (addressed in Appendix
D) is only possible if the components encapsulate
PWR components containing borated water.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel and
Cast Iron
(Contd)
Loss of
Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
contaminants
1

or
2

V.B-9
VII.C1-18,
VII.C3-9,
VII.G-25,
VII.H1-8,
VII.H1-9,
VII.H1-11
VIII.E-1,
VIII.E-39,
VIII.G-1,
VIII.G-40
No Sections 2.1.3, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.5
Specified items cite general, pitting, and crevice
corrosion of steel exposed to outdoor air or, for
steel (with or without coatings or wrappings)
exposed to soil (buried), also cite MIC.
However, specified GALL items do not cite
conditions/criteria for the mechanisms to be
applicable. Furthermore, GALL Chapter V, VII,
and VIII items are not consistent with respect to
crevice and pitting corrosion requiring
management in outdoor air or condensation.
GALL items VII.H1-8, VII.H1-11, VIII.E-39, and
VIII.G-40 cite crevice and pitting corrosion for
steel exposed to outdoor air, whereas GALL
items V.E-8, VII.I-9, and VIII.H-8 (not specified
for this item) cite only general corrosion of steel
in outdoor air.
GALL items V.C-2, V.E-10, VIII.H-10, and
VII.I-11 (not specified for this item) cite only
general corrosion as requiring management for
steel exposed to condensation, whereas this tool
describes criteria/conditions where pitting and
crevice may conservatively occur due to
condensation (and concentration of
contaminants).

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Carbon
and Low-
Alloy
Steel and
Cast Iron
(Contd)
Loss of
Material /
General
Corrosion
and
2a. Surface is exposed to humidity and/or
intermediate or frequent wetting
or
2b. Surface is buried
Note: General corrosion is of particular concern
outdoors where plant operating experience has shown
exposure to aggressive species (such as near seashore
and industrial areas) and indoors where surface is
wetted such as due to condensation from lower than
ambient internal fluid temperatures.

Plant-specific conditions may also support corrosion
rates being low enough that loss of material due to
general corrosion is not a concern.
V.A-1,
V.B-3,
V.B-9,
V.C-1,
V.C-2,
V.D2-2,
V.E-7,
V.E-8,
V.E-10
VII.C1-18,
VII.C3-9,
VII.D-3,
VII.F1-2,
VII.F2-2,
VII.F3-2,
VII.F4-1,
VII.G-25,
VII.H-9,
VII.I-8,
VII.I-9,
VII.I-11
VIII.E-1,
VIII.G-1,
VIII.H-7,
VIII.H-8,
VIII.H-10
Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.11
Specified GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII items
cite general corrosion as requiring management in
uncontrolled indoor air, condensation, outdoor
air, and buried environments.
As described for items above, certain items also
list pitting and crevice corrosion in outdoor air,
whereas others do not and no justification for the
difference is provided in the GALL (or its basis
NUREG/CR).
Also, certain items also list pitting and crevice
corrosion and MIC as requiring management for
steel (with or without coatings or wrappings)
exposed to soil, as described above.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Carbon
and Low-
Alloy
Steel and
Cast Iron
(Contd)
Loss of
Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
and
contaminants
1
or
2
, which provide an
electrolyte
None
No
Sections 2.1.3, 3.1.2
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII and VIII items do not
address galvanic corrosion of external component
surfaces.
Cast Iron
and
Copper
and
Copper
Alloys
Loss of
Material /
Selective
Leaching
and
2. Material is gray cast iron or brass/bronze >15%
Zn or aluminum bronze >8% Al
and
3. Material is not an inhibited copper alloy (e.g.,
with small amounts of tin, phosphorous, arsenic,
and antimony)
and
4a. Surface is buried or exposed to prolonged wetting
other than humidity
1

or
2

V.B-8,
V.D1-21,
V.D2-24
VII.C1-12,
VII.C3-5,
VII.G-15,
VII.H1-5,
VII.H2-15
VIII.E-22,
VIII.G-25
No
Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 3.1.9
Assumption 4.1.4
Specified GALL items are all for gray cast iron
exposed to soil.
list selective leaching of external surfaces of
copper alloys.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of
Material /
Boric Acid
Wastage
1. Material is a copper alloy with >15% Zn
and
water systems
V.E-11,
V.F-5
VII.I-12,
VII.J -5
Specified GALL items cite boric acid corrosion
for copper alloys >15% Zn, or indicate that no
aging effects require management for copper
alloy <15% Zn (items V.F-5 and VII.J -5), in air
with borated water leakage.
Loss of
Material /
Crevice and/or
Pitting
Corrosion
and
contaminants
1

or
2

VII.F1-16,
VII.F2-14,
VII.F3-16,
VII.F4-12
Yes Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.5
Specified GALL items list crevice and pitting
corrosion for copper alloys exposed to external
condensation.
Copper and
Copper
Alloys
Loss of
Material /
Galvanic
Corrosion
and
and
contaminants
1
or
2
, which provide an
electrolyte
address galvanic corrosion of external component
surfaces.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Copper and
Copper
Alloys
(Contd)
Cracking /
SCC/IGA
1. Material is Brass >15% Zn or aluminum bronze
with >8% Al
and
2. Surface is subject to moisture (humidity) or
intermittent or prolonged wetting
and
3. Ammonia (NH
3
), ammonium salts, or sulfur
dioxide is present (e.g., from organic decay, in
industrial areas)

Note: Mechanism, as well as rapid loss of material
due to general corrosion, is a concern if plant-specific
operating experience shows presence of ammonia,
ammonium salts, or sulfur dioxide.
None No Sections 2.1.5, 3.1.1, and 3.2.2
include items for cracking of copper alloys.
Galvanized
Steel
Loss of
Material /
General
Corrosion
and
2. Component buried or subject to prolonged
wetting other than humidity (e.g., condensation,
leakage, pooling)
and
3a. pH >12 or pH <6
or
3b. Temperature >140F and <200F
V.F-1
VII.J -6
Yes Sections 2.1.8, 3.1.1, 3.5
Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.10
Specified GALL items indicate that no aging
effects require management for galvanized steel
in uncontrolled indoor air, but no technical basis
is provided for the determination.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Loss of
Material /
Boric Acid
Wastage
water systems

Note: It is conservatively assumed that galvanized
steel is susceptible to boric acid wastage based on a
lack of definitive evidence to the contrary.
include items addressing boric acid corrosion of
galvanized steel.
Galvanized
Steel
(Contd)
Reduction of
Fracture
Toughness /
Thermal
Embrittlement
None No Sections 2, 3.3.1, 3.5
include items addressing thermal embrittlement
of galvanized steel.


Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Nickel-
Base
Alloys and
Stainless
Steel
Loss of
Material /
Pitting and/or
Crevice
Corrosion
1. Temperature < 212F
and
2a. Surface is buried or subject to a concentration of
contaminants
1

or
2

IV.E-1,
IV.E-2
V.D1-26,
V.D2-27,
V.F-11,
V.F-12,
V.F-13
VII.C1-16,
VII.C3-8,
VII.F1-1,
VII.F2-1,
VII.F3-1,
VII.G-20,
VII.H1-7,
VII.H2-19,
VII.J-14,
VII.J-15,
VII.J-16
VIII.E-28,
VIII.G-31,
VIII.I-9,
VIII.I-10
Yes
Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4
Assumptions 4.1.2

GALL items V.D1-26, V.D2-27, VII.F1-1,
VII.F2-1, VII.F3-1, VII.C1-16, VII.C3-8, VII.G-
20, VII.H1-7, VII.H2-19, VIII.E-28, and VIII.G-
31 cite crevice and pitting corrosion of stainless
steel exposed to soil (buried) or condensation
(e.g., concentration of contaminants).
Otherwise, the specified GALL items indicate
that no aging effects require management for
nickel alloys exposed to uncontrolled indoor air
or for stainless steel exposed to uncontrolled
indoor air or air with borated water leakage.

Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool
vs
GALL
Match
Discussion
Stainless
Steel
Cracking /
SCC
and
and
contaminants
1

or
2

Assumptions 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.6, 4.1.7
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items for
SCC of stainless steel are all focused on wetted
internal surfaces.
Titanium
and
Titanium
Alloys
Loss of
Material /
Crevice
Corrosion
and
and
contaminants
1

or
2

None No Sections 2, 3.1.3
include items for titanium or titanium alloys.
1 Prolonged or frequent wetting (e.g., from condensation, leakage, ponding/pooling) or alternate wetting and drying can concentrate contaminants from the
atmosphere and they can thereby become aggressive species for metals. Infrequent or intermittent wetting (e.g., limited time periods with condensation) are
not expected to concentrate contaminants sufficiently to become aggressive for metals.
2 Where plant-specific operating experience has shown exposure to aggressive species in outdoor locations, such as salt air in marine areas and sulfur
dioxide, acid rain etc. in industrial areas, the normal atmosphere should be considered to be aggressive to exposed metals.

Figure 1 External Surface Tool

N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
External
Surface is not
submerged, in
splash zone,
or continuously
wetted?
Temperature > 212F? Temperature > 400F?
Use Raw or Treated
Water Tool
(Appendix B or A)
Thermal embrittlement is
a concern.
Thermal embrittlement is
not a concern.
N
Carbon or Low
Alloy Steel or
Cast Iron?
to general corrosion is
not a concern.
Is surface buried or subject to prolonged/cyclic
wetting other than humidity (e.g.
condensation, leakage, pooling/ponding) and
concentration of contaminants?
pitting, galvanic corrosion, MIC,
selective leaching and cracking
due to SCC are not a concern.
Stainless Steel or
Nickel-Base Alloy?
Titanium and
Titanium Alloy?
Cracking due to SCC
may be a concern.
Exposed to leakage from a
PWR borated water system?
Stainless Steel?
Temperature
> 140F?
not a concern.
Loss of material due to crevice, pitting corrosion is
a concern (crevice only for titanium/titanium alloys).
Temperature
> 160F?
Outdoor or buried
location with pH <
10.5?
is a concern.
not a concern.
Galvanized Steel?
Y
Y
Is surface exposed to an aggressive
environment (e.g., where plant operating
experience has shown exposure in marine or
industrial atmospheres)?
Y
Loss of material due to boric acid wastage
may be a concern.
Loss of material due to boric acid
wastage is not a concern.
N
Is surface exposed to
humidity or to wetting?
Y
Y
To next
page
(top left)
Figure 1 External Surface Tool
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Carbon Steel or Low Alloy
Steel or Cast Iron or
Aluminum or Aluminum
Alloy or Copper or Copper
Alloy?
Brass/Bronze w/ > 15% Zn
Copper alloy is not inhibited
(e.g., does not have small
amounts of tin, arsenic, etc.)?
Y
N
Aluminum Alloy w/ > 12% Zn
or > 6%Mg?
Is component connected to a dissimilar
metal that is more cathodic (noble) in
the galvanic series?
corrosion may be a concern.
N
Galvanized
Steel?
Is pH > 12
or PH < 6?
Loss of material due to general corrosion is a concern.
Temperature > 140F
and < 200F?
Y
Y
From
previous
page *
Gray Cast Iron?
is a concern.
is a concern.
galvanic, pitting corrosion, selective
leaching and cracking due to SCC
are not a concern.
* Temperature is less than 212F and surface is subject to prolonged/cyclic wetting, other than
humidity, and/or is exposed to an aggressive environment (e.g., plant operating experience has
shown exposure in marine or industrial atmospheres).
Does plant-specific experience indicate
ammonia (NH3), ammonium salts, or sulfur
dioxide (SO
2
) is present (e.g., from organic
decay or in industrial areas)?
Cracking due to SCC/IGA and loss of material
due to general corrosion may be a concern.
Cracking due to SCC/IGA and loss of material due to
general corrosion are not a concern.
Y
N
N

5. REFERENCES
1. G. E. Troxell, H. E. Davis, and J . W. Kelly, Composition and Properties of Concrete, Second
Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1968.
September 1987.
3. H. H. Uhlig, Corrosion Handbook, J ohn Wiley and Sons, 1948.
5. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986.
6. W. H. Ailor, Atmospheric Corrosion, J ohn Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982.
7. D. J . DePaul, ed., Corrosion and Wear Handbook for Water Cooled Reactors, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1957.
8. B. Craig, Environmentally Induced Cracking, Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Vol. 13,
Corrosion, American Society for Metals International, Materials Park, OH, 1987.
Power Plant Operating Licenses, Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1009, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C., December 1990.
Condenser Water Boxes at Crystal River-3, Proceedings of the Third International
Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Reactors,
American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 1987, p. 647.
11. Metals Handbook, Desk Edition, American Society for Metals, Materials Park, OH, 1985.
12. D. H. Pope, A Study of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Power Plants
and a Practical Guide for Countermeasures, EPRI NP-4582, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA,
May 1986.
Lynchburg, VA, J une 1996.
14. PWR Reactor Coolant System License Renewal Industry Report, Project RP 2643-32,
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, May 1992.

15. D. Deng, et al., Class 1 Structures License Renewal Industry Report; Revision 1, EPRI
TR-103842, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Final Report, J uly 1994.
16. R. H. J ones, Stress Corrosion Cracking, American Society of Metals, Materials Park,
OH, 1992.
17. S. Yukawa, Review and Evaluation of the Toughness of Austenitic Steels and Nickel Alloys
after Long-Term Elevated Temperature Exposures, WRC Bulletin 378, Welding Research
Council, New York, NY, J anuary 1993.
York, 1977.
19. System Material Analysis Department Report on the Evaluation of Material from Dresden
Unit 2 Reactor Head Closure Studs, CECo Document M-03166-93, Commonwealth Edison
Company, Chicago, IL, May 1993.
20. Nickell, M. A. Rinckel, Evaluation of Thermal Aging Embrittlement for Cast Austenitic
Stainless Steel Components, TR-106092, Research Project 2643-33, Final Report,
March 1996.
21. F. L. LaQue and H.R. Cupson, Corrosion Resistance of Metals and Alloys. Reinhold
Publishing Company, New York, 2
nd
Edition, Copyright 1963.
22. J . C. Lynn, W. R. Warke, and P. Gordon, Solid Metal-Induced Embrittlement of Steel,
Materials Science and Engineering 18 (1975), Pages 51-62.
23. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants, Revision 1, EPRI TR-106611, 1998.
24. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, American Society of Metals
25. Aging Effects for Structures and Structural Components (Structural Tools), EPRI 1002950
(successor to TR-114881, 1997), J uly 2003.
26. J .F. Malloy, Thermal Insulation, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Copyright 1969.
27. J .F. Hall, Literature Survey of Low Alloy Steel Fastener Corrosion in PWR Plant, EPRI
Report NP-3784, August 1984.
28. M.G. Fontana and R.W. Staehle, Advances in Corrosion Science and Technology -
Volume 5, Plenum Press, Copyright 1976.
29. Engineered Materials Handbook (Desk Edition), Design and Engineering Properties of
Glasses, American Society of Metals, International, Copyright 2002.
30. Engineered Materials Handbook (Desk Edition), Introduction to Engineering Plastics
Environmental Factors, American Society of Metals, International, Copyright 2002.

31. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, Article
Effect of the Environment on the Performance of Plastics, ASM International,
Copyright 2003.
Plastics, Elastomers and Linings, and Fabrics, Fourth Edition, Parts A, B and C, Marcel
Dekker, Copyright 1995
34. EPRI Report 1003057, License Renewal Electrical Handbook, December 2001.
Appendix F - Bolted Closures

which are addressed in this appendix, include bolted flange connections for vessels and heat
exchangers (i.e., manways and hand holes), flanged joints in piping, body-to-bonnet joints in valves,
and pressure retaining bolting associated with pumps and miscellaneous process components; these
bolted joints are hereafter referred to as bolted closures. Structural and component support bolting
is not addressed in this appendix but is included in the structural tools being developed separately.

Bolted Closures-Appendix F i
CONTENTS

Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Regulatory Bolting Safety Issue ....................................................................... 1-1
2. BOLTED CLOSURES SCOPE................................................... 2-1
3. AGING EFFECTS .......................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Loss of Pre-Load................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1.1 Embedment.......................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Cyclic Load Embedment ..................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.3 Gasket Creep........................................................................................................ 3-2
3.1.4 Thermal Effects.................................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.5 Self-Loosening..................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2 Cracking of Bolting Materials .......................................................................... 3-3
3.3 Loss of Material Corrosion of Bolting Materials......................................... 3-4
3.4 Reduction of Fracture Toughness .................................................................... 3-5
3.5 Operating Experience and Generic Communications.................................... 3-5
3.5.1 NPRDS Review................................................................................................... 3-5
3.5.2 NRC Generic Communications........................................................................... 3-5
4. SUMMARY...................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 GALL Comparison............................................................................................ 4-1
5. REFERENCES................................................................................ 5-1

Bolted Closures-Appendix F ii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary Bolted Closures..................................................4-4

Bolted Closures-Appendix F 1-1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
which are addressed in this appendix, include bolted flange connections for vessels and heat
exchangers (i.e., manways and hand holes), flanged joints in piping, body-to-bonnet joints in valves,
and pressure retaining bolting associated with pumps and miscellaneous process components; these
bolted joints are hereafter referred to as bolted closures. (Structural and component support bolting
is addressed in the Structural Tools) [6]. A bolted closure includes the constituents of a bolted joint,
e.g., seating surfaces (i.e., flange set surfaces), gasket (if applicable), and pressure retaining bolting.
Only non-Class 1 bolted closures are addressed in this document.
Aging management programs required to assure bolted closure integrity will be addressed on a
plant-specific basis using general recommendations provided in Section 4.0. The scope of bolted
closures is discussed in Section 2.0, and typical aging effects that may cause loss of mechanical
closure integrity are discussed in Section 3.0.
1.2 Regulatory Bolting Safety Issue
The NRC noted that from 1964 to the early 1980s there had been an increasing number of reported
failures of high-strength bolting in safety-related equipment and Class 1 component supports [1].
The most common failures of pressure retaining bolting in safety-related equipment were attributed
to boric acid corrosion wastage and a few instances of stress corrosion cracking (SCC). The most
frequently observed failure mode for structural bolting was SCC of low-alloy quenched and
tempered steels and maraging steels.
The bolting safety issue originally was an integral part of the NRCs unresolved safety Issue A-12,
which dealt with fracture toughness concerns related to steam generator and reactor coolant pump
supports. The NRC then recognized the need to assess bolting safety issues separately and issued
Generic Safety Issue 29, Bolting Degradation or Failure in Nuclear Power Plants. The safety
aspects of GSI 29 included concerns over degradation of fasteners that comprise critical bolting
applications in nuclear power plants. In J une 1982, the NRC issued IE Bulletin 82-02, which
required responsive actions by all pressurized-water-reactor licensees because threaded fastener
failures had shown an increasing frequency of occurrence. In response to the NRC concerns over
fastener integrity, the Atomic Industrial Forum (AIF) joined with the Material Properties Council
(MPC) to form the J oint AIF/MPC Task Group on Bolting in J une 1982. When the NRC prioritized
generic issues in November 1982, GSI 29 was assigned a high priority.
The J oint AIF/MPC Task Group on Bolting developed a comprehensive industry program to resolve
GSI 29. Specifically, a 19-task Generic Bolting Program was developed and the Electric Power
Research Institute organized a matrix-managed Generic Bolted J oint Integrity Program to carry out
the recommendations contained in the task list. Results of the 19-task program are contained in a
two-volume EPRI report, NP-5769 [2], which was published in April 1988. The work completed to
resolve GSI 29, as documented in the EPRI report [2], showed that (1) existing requirements, (2)
leak-before-break criteria for Class 1 joints, and (3) existing programs should minimize the risk
resulting from the failure of safety-related bolting in current plants. In addition, the NRC staff
concurred with the recommendations and guidelines provided in Section 1, Volume 2 of the EPRI
report [2].
A major finding of the Generic Program was that the design of critical closure joint bolting involves
enough redundancy to ensure that there is no pressing concern regarding bolting integrity. In
addition, it was recommended that licensees implement plant-specific bolting integrity programs that
reflect the information and recommendations made by the industry-sponsored programs on bolting
issues. While the focus of the study was on Class 1 bolted closures, all safety-related closures were
considered.

2. BOLTED CLOSURES SCOPE
The scope of the bolted closure tool includes surfaces of bolted flange connections for vessels (i.e.,
manways, hand holes, etc.), flanged joints in piping, body-to-bonnet joints in valves, and pressure
retaining bolting associated with pumps and miscellaneous process components. As discussed in
Section 2.0 of the Implementation Guideline, gaskets, packing, seals, and o-rings are typically
excluded from the scope of license renewal where these components are not relied upon for a SSC to
perform its intended function.
Pressure boundary bolting, typically referred to as fasteners, includes nuts, bolts, studs, and
capscrews. Typical fastener materials include carbon steelA307, A36, SAE J 429, A325, A449,
and A490; low-alloy steelA193 B7, B7M, A 320 L7, L7M, L70; and austenitic stainless steel
A193 B8 and B8M, and A320 B8 and B8M.
Class 1 to Non-Class 1 Boundary
The Class 1 ISI boundary typically extends to and includes either the first or second isolation valve
or a flow restricting orifice in branch lines attached to the reactor coolant system main coolant
piping and other major RCS (PWRs) or primary system (BWRs) components. For flanged
connections that define a Class boundary, the Class 1 portion includes the face of the first flange (the
bolts may be considered part of the non-Class 1 piping). For threaded joints, the Class 1 boundary
includes the threaded joint in screwed connections.

3. AGING EFFECTS
The governing aging effect to consider for bolted closures is loss of mechanical closure integrity.
Loss of mechanical closure integrity may be attributed to one or more of the following aging effects
that may be applicable to the bolted joint: loss of pre-load, cracking of bolting material, loss of
bolting material, and reduction of fracture toughness of bolting material. In the discussion presented
below, aging mechanisms that may result in the aforementioned aging effects are discussed. The
mechanisms discussed are not intended to represent a comprehensive list of aging mechanisms and
are provided for general information only. The discussion of aging mechanisms is extracted from
the EPRI manuals on good bolting practices [3, 4].
3.1 Loss of Pre-Load
Pre-load is the tension force developed in a fastener when it is tightened against a joint. The pre-
load in a bolt is often less than expected and decrease of the pre-load may be attributed to, but not
limited to, one or more of the following effects: embedment, cyclic load embedment, gasket creep,
thermal effects (e.g., yield stress effect, modulus of elasticity effect, and stress relaxation), and self-
loosening. These effects are discussed at length in References 3 and 4 and are briefly summarized
below. These effects are typically addressed upon installation and subsequent maintenance of the
joint.
In addition to being precluded by design, the loss of pre-load in a mechanical joint can only result in
leakage, not failure of that joint. This leakage does not impact the pressure boundary such that the
component's intended function is not accomplished. It is noted that in ASME Section III (NX-
2121), gaskets, seals, and O-rings are not considered to perform a pressure retaining function and
therefore, these parts are typically not considered to support a component intended function. It
follows that the loss of pre-load from the above mechanisms does not result in loss of mechanical
closure or loss of pressure boundary integrity. Therefore, loss of pre-load is not an applicable aging
effect.
3.1.1 Embedment
Fastener and joint surfaces are microscopically rough. When first assembled, these surfaces (nut,
bolt threads, joint members, etc.) only contact each other on high spots.
When initially loaded the high spots tend to creep and flow. Pre-load is lost as the parts settle in
together. The corresponding loss of pre-load is considered small and will have minimal effect on
connection integrity.
3.1.2 Cyclic Load Embedment
J oints subjected to cyclic loads, especially large loads, will embed and relax more than joints under
static loads. If external loads approximate the yield strength of the bolt, pre-load losses of 25% or
even 50% may occur.
3.1.3 Gasket Creep
Gaskets must be partially plastic to function properly and will creep after initial loading. Pre-load
loss at room temperature may be 2-5% and will occur in 10 to 20 minutes after initial loading.
3.1.4 Thermal Effects
A joint subjected to a change in temperature can lose pre-load. Differential expansion between bolts
and joint members can increase stresses and increase embedment or gasket creep. The bolt may
expand away from the joint. The gasket may be compressed beyond the original compression and,
due to hysteresis, wont fully recover as the temperature change is reversed. Creep of bolts and
gaskets can be promoted by high temperature through a process called stress relaxation.
At elevated temperatures, a material subject to constant stress below its yield strength will flow
plastically and permanently change dimensions in the direction of the stress. Also at elevated
temperatures, a fastener will produce less and less clamping force with time, referred to as
relaxation. Such elements as material, temperature, initial stress, manufacturing method, and design
affect the rate of relaxation. Relaxation is a critical condition in the design of fasteners for service at
elevated temperatures. A bolted joint at 1200F can lose as much as 50% of preload. Furthermore,
elevated temperature behavior, e.g., where relaxation might occur, begins at approximately 400F
for aluminum alloys, 700F for low-alloy steels, and higher for austenitic stainless steels [8].
Aluminum bolting is not typically used in nuclear plant applications. As such, stress relaxation is a
consideration in the design of bolting for service at elevated temperatures, and the temperatures
experienced at nuclear plants are below the 700F where relaxation might occur. Therefore, loss of
preload due to thermal effects is not an applicable aging effect.
3.1.5 Self-Loosening
Vibration, flexing of the joint, cyclic shear loads, thermal cycles, and other factors can cause whole
or partial self-loosening of a fastener. Self-loosening is not an applicable aging effect since it would
be detected early in component service life and actions are taken to prevent recurrence, except as
noted. Vibration of equipment that is infrequently operated, such as diesel generators, may result in
self loosening of associated fasteners that may not be detected early in service life. Plant-specific
consideration of its bolting practices and history is suggested.
3.2 Cracking of Bolting Materials
Cracking of bolting materials may be attributed to stress corrosion cracking and/or fatigue.
Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC)
Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) is a condition in which a fastener that is statically loaded well
below the material yield strength can suddenly fail. SCC occurs through the combination of high
stress (both applied and residual tensile stresses), a corrosive environment, and a susceptible
material. SCC bolted closure fastener failures have occurred in materials with apparently nominal
chemical and mechanical properties [2]. Service and laboratory failures have been observed for
bolting materials subjected to water or steam environments containing various contaminants.
Carbon and alloy steel fasteners are not intentionally exposed to water or steam, but inadvertent
exposure may result from gasket leaks. If leakage is combined with contaminant species, such as
sulfides or chlorides, an aggressive environment that can promote SCC may result. Decomposition
products from lubricants and sealant compounds injected into leaking closures may produce
environments capable of causing SCC in stressed fasteners.
Reported failures of bolting owing to SCC have been limited to high strength or ultra high strength
bolting (i.e., Sy >150 ksi). Some failures occurred with materials specified as medium strength
(i.e., 120 ksi <Sy <150 ksi), however these SCC failures were primarily due to poor heat treatment
resulting in overly hard material condition [2]. The medium strength material failures due to SCC
have been related to poor quality control and not due to aging. Specifically, the failures that have
been reported for two classes of bolting materials are for high-nickel maraging steels and low-alloy
quenched and tempered (LAQT) steels. Both high-nickel maraging steels and LAQT steels are
commonly used for NSSS component support bolting. Since none of the reported failures occurred
in bolts of less than 1.25-inch diameter, it is recommended that only high strength bolts or studs
greater than one inch nominal diameter be reviewed for SCC as a potential aging mechanism.
A common factor in several of the reported failures appears to be the use of lubricants containing
molybdenum disulfide (MoS
2
) [2]. Laboratory tests indicate that hydrogen sulfide (H
2
S) may result
from MoS
2
decomposition in aqueous environments; however, there is no data that conclusively
shows that MoS
2
decomposition will cause SCC. Data generated by the oil and gas industry shows
that even at low temperatures, H
2
S will cause SCC in carbon and alloy steel fasteners. Therefore,
MoS
2
-induced SCC is viewed as a possible explanation for some of the reactor coolant pressure
boundary bolted closure failures. However, in response to NRC IE Bulletin 82-02, utilities verified
that threaded fastener lubricants have specified maximum allowable chloride and sulfur content to
minimize the potential for SCC. Additionally, utilities verified that specific maintenance procedures
and training were performed to address bolted closures and tensioning and detensioning practices.
The use of appropriate materials (such as ASTM A193 Gr. B7) for bolting also reduces the potential
for SCC of fasteners by maintaining fastener minimum yield strengths below threshold values found
in Reference 2. Additionally, sound maintenance bolt torquing practices can control bolting
material stresses. A review of industry failure databases and NRC generic communications supports
the fact that these actions (material selection, proper maintenance and torquing procedures, removal
of contaminants from lubricants) have been effective in eliminating the potential for SCC of bolting
materials.
Therefore, cracking of bolting due to stress corrosion cracking is not an applicable aging effect for
typical non-Class 1 nuclear plant bolting materials, but may be a concern in plant-specific instances
where high-strength bolting materials or molybdenum disulfide (MoS
2
) lubricants are used.
Fatigue
Cracking of bolting due to fatigue is typically characterized by the following: (1) the failure is
sudden with little or no necking-down of the part, (2) the component has been subjected to cyclic
tensile loads, and (3) usually the cyclic loads are well below the material tensile strength. The
susceptibility to fatigue depends upon many factors including the properties of the fastener
materials, fastener processing, defects in the material, stress levels, and the shape of the fastener.
However, cracking of bolting due to thermal fatigue is not expected to be a concern for non-Class 1
bolting applications due to low operating temperatures compared to the Class 1 bolting applications.
High cycle fatigue is not a concern for license renewal since it would be discovered during the
current license period in most cases where systems are frequently operated. For standby systems
subject to periodic testing, such as HPCI, failure caused by high cycle fatigue may be a longer term
issue. Evaluation of high cycle fatigue for infrequently used systems is not addressed and should be
considered on a case-by-case basis by the user of this document.
3.3 Loss of Material Corrosion of Bolting Materials
Loss of material due to boric acid wastage is the most common aging affect that has been observed
for carbon and low-alloy steel fasteners. Stainless steel fasteners are highly resistant to loss of
material due to general corrosion and to boric acid wastage.
Consistent with the applicable aging effects identified for external surfaces, documented separately
in Appendix E, the following aging effects are conservatively considered to be applicable to carbon
and alloy steel bolting materials:
Loss of material due to general corrosion in moist environments (e.g., if temperatures are
<212F)
Loss of material due to crevice or pitting corrosion in prolonged or frequently wetted locations
(such as due to condensation, submersion, or in the splash zone)
Loss of material due to boric acid wastage in PWR locations susceptible to leakage from
systems containing borated water.
Reduction in fracture toughness due to irradiation embrittlement is not applicable to the non-Class 1
bolted closure scope since these closures are not within the beltline region of the reactor vessel.
Some precipitation hardened martensitic stainless steels (e.g., 17-4 PH) may be susceptible to
thermal embrittlement [2] in high temperature applications, which could lead to a reduction in
fracture toughness.
3.5 Operating Experience and Generic Communications
3.5.1 NPRDS Review
A review of NPRDS information was performed to determine documented instances of loss of
mechanical closure integrity of bolted connections for non-Class 1 mechanical systems. As
discussed in Appendices A and B, failures of gaskets, packing, and O-rings are the most common
failure mode for bolted closures. The failures were detected during ISI, IST, surveillance testing,
and system walkdowns. However, failures of gaskets, packing, and O-rings result in leakage and
typically are not considered to result in loss of mechanical closure integrity. The only exception to
this would be a situation where a gasket/seal is utilized to provide a radiological boundary/barrier
and thus may support an intended function. Gaskets, packing, and O-rings are considered
consumables and (in general) are not relied upon for the performance of intended functions under 10
CFR 54 [5]. Therefore, these items do not require an aging management review.
Information Notices
IN 80-29: Broken Studs On Terry Turbine Steam Inlet Flange
When removing the governor and stop valve on the Unit 1 steam driven emergency feedwater pump
at Arkansas Nuclear One for repair of a steam leak at the steam inlet flange, Arkansas Power and
Light discovered that five of the eight studs securing the flange were broken. The failed studs are
3/4 in. diameter by 3-1/2 in. long and are thought to be of ASTM A-193 grade B7 steel. The turbine
flange bolting is generally covered with insulation and not visible for inspection. From the
information available, the bolting has not been removed or inspected since installation seven to eight
years ago. Licensees are encouraged to carefully examine insulation in the flange to turbine casing
region for evidence of leakage and consider inspection of the turbine steam inlet flange bolting.
Further, during surveillance testing, care should be taken to observe if abnormal vibration or other
transients occur which could promote loss of bolting integrity.
Generic Letters
GL 88-05: Boric Acid Corrosion of Carbon Steel Reactor Pressure Boundary Components in PWR
Plants
GL 88-05 was issued by the NRC in response to repeated instances at multiple sites of minor reactor
coolant fluid leaks (below technical specification limitations) causing severe corrosion of low-alloy
carbon steel components, including bolting. The RCS fluid boric acid concentration is typically too
low to cause damage to these components. However, once exposed to ambient conditions, the leaked
fluid loses a substantial portion of its water through evaporation, leaving behind a highly
concentrated boric acid solution or boric acid crystals. Although this GL is primarily geared toward
the RCS pressure boundary and Class 1 components, it is included here due to the fact that loss of
material due to boric acid wastage applies to non-Class 1 components as well.
GL 91-17: Bolting Degradation or Failure in Nuclear Power Plants
GL 91-17 provided licensees with information on GSI 29, which addressed degradation of all safety-
related bolts, studs, embedments, machine cap screws, and other threaded fasteners. The NRC
concluded that existing requirements, in combination with actions taken in response to industry
initiatives, are sufficient to assure integrity of safety-related bolting.
IE Bulletins
BL 82-02: Degradation of Threaded Fasteners in Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary of PWR Plants
BL 82-02 alerted licensees to instances of degradation of threaded fasteners in closures in the reactor
coolant pressure boundary and required appropriate corrective actions. Degradation of RCPB
fasteners was reported at selected plants and resulted from boric acid wastage at bolted closures. In
addition, BL 82-02 reported that sealant compounds, such as Furmanite, may contain variable
compositions of halogens and sulfur which are leachable and promoters of SCC. BL 82-02 also
reported that certain lubricants may contain a significant level of sulfide constituent, which can
promote SCC. The actions taken in response to BL 82-02 were submitted to the NRC by each of the
participating utilities.

4. SUMMARY
As discussed in Sections 1.2 and 3.3, the most common failures of bolted closures in safety-related
equipment have been attributed to boric acid wastage, with a few instances of stress corrosion
cracking (SCC) of the bolting. Section 3 discusses loss of material and cracking as applicable aging
effects for bolted closures.
Appropriate design and installation practices can eliminate cracking as an applicable aging effect for
bolting. If high strength bolts (with tensile strengths above 150 ksi) are precluded by design,
through specification or procurement, and if the use of lubricants containing molybdenum disulfide
is controlled/prohibited, then SCC is not an applicable aging effect for the bolting.
As such, except in plant-specific instances where high strength bolting materials or molybdenum
disulfide lubricants are used, there are no aging effects that are applicable to bolting materials other
than those that are applicable to the external surfaces of components joined by bolting (described in
Appendix E).
Table 4-1 identifies the applicable aging effects for bolting, and corresponding mechanisms, that
may require programmatic oversight (management) for the period of extended operation, as well as
the applicability criteria for the occurrence and propagation of the mechanisms.
4.1 GALL Comparison
mechanical components. GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for bolting
addressed by this tool. The identification and evaluation of aging management programs (AMPs) is
outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described in
Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Table 4-1, with the
following component, material, environment, aging effect, and aging mechanism considerations.
Component identification is outside the scope of this tool. The GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII
items that are applicable to this tool include those for bolting, closure bolting, control rod drive head
penetration flange bolting, duct closure bolting, high pressure pump closure bolting, and steam
generator closure bolting as the Structure and/or Component. The materials for the pertinent
items in GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the materials in this tool and
include high-strength low-alloy steel, high-strength steel, low-alloy steel, stainless steel, and steel,
or a combination.
Specific environments are not described in this tool, but the indoor air and outdoor air environments
described in Appendix E, the External Surfaces Tool, are implicit to the consideration of bolting,
since the bolting joins external surfaces and is not exposed to the internal medium of the joined
components, except through leakage. The following GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII
environments describe conditions that are considered in this tool for determining whether an aging
effect is applicable:
Air with borated water leakage
Air with reactor coolant leakage
Air with steam or water leakage
System temperature up to 340C (644F)
The GALL does not evaluate mechanisms separately, as is done in Section 3 of this tool. The
following aging effects are cited in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII for the various bolting
components, with the mechanism or groupings of mechanisms, depending on material susceptibility
and/or environment:
Cracking/cyclic loading, stress corrosion cracking
Crackling/stress corrosion cracking
Loss of material/boric acid corrosion
Loss of material/general corrosion
Loss of material/general, pitting, and crevice corrosion
Loss of material/wear
Loss of preload/thermal effects, gasket creep, and self-loosening
GALL item IV.A2-6 cites loss of material due to wear as an aging effect requiring management for
stainless steel PWR control rod drive head penetration flange bolting exposed to air with reactor
coolant leakage. No further basis is provided in the GALL as to the cause of bolting wear. GALL
Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items do not otherwise address wear of bolting, except for Class 1
bolting (e.g., reactor vessel closure studs). Wear of bolting is not an aging mechanism evaluated in
this tool.
GALL items IV.C1-11 (BWR reactor coolant pressure boundary piping and components) and
IV.C2-10 (PWR reactor coolant pressure boundary piping and components) are the only items in
GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, or VIII that explicitly address fatigue of bolting. This is consistent with
the corresponding discussion in Section 3.2 of this appendix, which indicates that cracking due to
thermal fatigue is not a concern for non-Class 1 bolting. Otherwise, fatigue related items are
addressed separately in Appendix H.
Gall items IV.D1-10 and IV.D2-6 cite loss of preload/thermal effects, gasket creep, and self-
loosening as an aging effect requiring management for steam generator (PWR) closure bolting
exposed to system temperatures up to 644F. GALL item IV.A2-8 cites loss of preload/thermal
effects, gasket creep, and self-loosening as an aging effect requiring management for stainless steel
(PWR) control rod head penetration flange bolting exposed to air with reactor coolant leakage.
GALL items V.E-5, VII.I-5, and VIII.H-5 also cite loss of preload/thermal effects, gasket creep, and
self-loosening as an aging effect requiring management for steel closure bolting exposed to
uncontrolled indoor air. GALL Chapter IX definitions and terms standardizing aging effects further
indicate that thermal effects include differential expansion, creep, or stress relaxation, and that self-
loosening includes vibration, joint flexing, cyclic shear loads, and thermal cycles. This GALL
description is based on references such as EPRI NP-5067, which was also used as a reference during
the development of this tool, and includes indication that the aging effect/mechanism had been
accepted by the industry as being in the scope of license renewal.
However, the mechanisms for a loss of preload are addressed in Sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.5 and
were determined to not be applicable aging mechanisms. While PWR steam generator closure and
control rod drive head penetration flange bolting will experience higher temperatures than other
non-Class 1 closure bolting, none of the nuclear plant closure bolting will experience temperatures
above 700F, where stress relaxation (thermal effects) may be expected (as described in
Section 3.1.4).

Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary Bolted Closures
Aging Effect
/
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Relevant Section(s) and Discussion
Cracking /
SCC
1. Surface is subject to prolonged or frequent wetting
other than humidity (e.g., from condensation, leakage)
and
2a. High-strength bolts are used (e.g., Sy >150 ksi)
or
2b. Molybdenum disulfide lubricants are used.

Note: Any instances where high-strength bolts or
molybdenum disulfide lubricants are used for bolted
closures are not typical and require plant-specific
evaluation.
IV.C2-7,
IV.D1-2

V.E-3

VII.E1-8,
VII.I-3

VIII.H-3
Yes Section 3.2

Specified GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII items cite stress
corrosion cracking as a mechanism for cracking of high-
strength steel closure bolting that is exposed to air with
steam or water leakage (a corrosive environment).

These GALL items also list cyclic loading as a mechanism
for high-strength steel closure bolting exposed to air with
steam or water leakage. Cyclic loading is considered to be
a design consideration and is not addressed in this tool as
an applicable aging mechanism for cracking of fasteners.

Also, GALL items IV.C2-7 and IV.D1-2 each cite
cracking due to stress corrosion cracking as an aging effect
requiring management for steel, high strength low-alloy
steel, stainless steel, or combination PWR control rod
drive head penetration flange bolting exposed to air with
reactor coolant leakage.
Loss of
Material /
Boric Acid
Wastage
water systems
V.E-2

VII.I-2

VIII.H-2
Yes Section 3.3

Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to boric
acid corrosion as an aging effect requiring management for
steel bolting exposed to air with borated water leakage.


Table 4-1 Aging Effects Summary Bolted Closures
Aging Effect
/
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Loss of
Material /
General
Corrosion
1. Temperature <212F V.B-2,
V.E-6

VII.F1-4,
VII.F2-4,
VII.F3-4,
VII.F4-3,
VII.I-6,
VII.I-7

VIII.H-6
No Section 3.3

Specified GALL item cites loss of material due to general
corrosion as an aging effect requiring management for
steel closure bolting exposed to air with steam or water
leakage or uncontrolled indoor air.
Loss of
Material /
Crevice and
Pitting
Corrosion
and
2. Bolting is subject to prolonged or frequent wetting
other than humidity (e.g., from condensation,
leakage)
V.E-1,
V.E-4

VII.D-1,
VII.I-1,
VII.I-4

VIII.H-1,
VIII.H-4
Yes Section 3.3

Specified GALL items also list general corrosion of steel
bolting, closure bolting, and closure bolting exposed to
condensation (a wetted environment), outdoor air, and
uncontrolled indoor air.

5. REFERENCES
1. Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 29: Bolting Degradation or Failure in Nuclear Power
Plants, NUREG-1339, J une 1990.
2. Degradation and Failure of Bolting in Nuclear Power Plants, Volumes 1 and 2, EPRI NP-
5769, Project 2520-7, Final Report, April 1988.
3. J ohn Bickford and Michael Looram, Good Bolting Practices, A Reference Manual for Nuclear
Power Plant Maintenance Personnel, Volume 1: Large Bolt Manual, EPRI-NP-5067, 1987.
4. Daniel A. Van Duyne, Good Bolting Practices, A Reference Manual for Nuclear Power Plant
Maintenance Personnel, Volume 2: Small Bolts and Threaded Fasteners, EPRI, December 1990.
5. Grimes, C. I., Consumables, License Renewal Issue No. 98-0012, United States Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, April 20, 1999.
1002950, August 2003.
7. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 13, Corrosion, ASM International 1987.
8. Metals Handbook, Ninth Edition, Volume 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, ASM
International 1986.

Appendix G - Heat Exchangers

This appendix provides the guidance, exceptions, and clarifications for using the Aging
Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants Heat Exchangers [1] to assist in
the identification of aging effects of heat exchangers defined to be within the license renewal scope.
It provides a summary of the aging effects identified in the aforementioned guideline and identifies
inconsistencies between that guideline and the logic described in the other Mechanical Tools
(appendices).

CONTENTS

Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Scope ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Purpose and Objective ...................................................................................... 1-2
2. GUIDANCE FOR HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATIONS....... 2-1
3. AMG HEAT EXCHANGERS EVALUATED............................... 3-1
4. HEAT EXCHANGERS IN THE SCOPE OF LICENSE
RENEWAL....................................................................................... 4-1
5. EXCEPTIONS/CLARIFICATIONS/CAUTIONS ...................... 5-1
6. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM HEAT EXCHANGER
AMG................................................................................................. 6-1
7. COMPARISON TO GALL HEAT EXCHANGER ITEMS........ 7-1
8. REFERENCES................................................................................ 8-1

Heat Exchangers-Appendix G i
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3-1 Heat Exchangers Evaluated by the AMG...................................................... 3-2
Table 6-1 Materials/Environment Combinations Evaluated in AMG............................ 6-1
Table 6-2 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Primary Water Environment............... 6-3
Table 6-3 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Treated Water Environment................ 6-4
Table 6-4 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Closed Cooling Water Environment... 6-6
Table 6-5 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Raw Water Environment..................... 6-7
Table 6-6 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Lubricating Oil Environment.............. 6-9
Table 6-7 Significant Aging Mechanisms for an Air Environment ............................. 6-10
Table 7-1 GALL - Tool Environments .......................................................................... 7-2
Table 7-2 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Primary Water Environment ..... 7-4
Table 7-3 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Treated Water Environment ...... 7-7
Table 7-4 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Closed Cooling
Water Environment ..................................................................................... 7-11
Table 7-5 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Raw Water Environment ......... 7-16
Table 7-6 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Lubricating Oil Environment .. 7-19
Table 7-7 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Air Environment ...................... 7-21

Heat Exchangers-Appendix G ii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In the development of the other Mechanical Tools for the evaluation of aging effects, the approach
to the identification of aging effects is less complex than the case for heat exchangers. That is, most
components can be evaluated from the standpoint of a single material in a single environment (e.g.,
carbon steel material in a raw water environment). For heat exchangers, there are usually multiple
materials and multiple environments. Although the other Mechanical Tools can be used for heat
exchangers depending on the specific material/environment combination, it is convenient to address
all heat exchanger aging effects with one source.
The Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants Heat Exchangers [1]
prepared by MDC-Ogden provides a single source to evaluate the many variables associated with
aging of heat exchangers. After a review of the technical content of the Aging Management
Guideline (AMG), the decision was made to use selected portions of the AMG for aging effect
identification, with appropriate guidance as outlined in this appendix.
1.2 Scope
This appendix provides a review of the aging effects for heat exchangers that are within the scope of
license renewal. The scope of this appendix includes the boundary of the heat exchangers up to their
interface with the system piping/ducting, the typical heat exchanger materials, and the environments
associated with heat exchanger service applications.
Plant-specific lists of systems within the scope of license renewal were reviewed to determine the
types of heat exchangers that may be subject to an aging management review. In most instances the
heat exchangers that may be subject to an aging management review are within the scope of the
AMG (Table 1-2 of Reference 1). This appendix provides guidance to the evaluator for the review
of heat exchangers by summarizing the AMG results in a format more consistent with the other
Mechanical Tools. This summary of results in a material/environment format, and the subsequent
guidance, provide the information necessary to evaluate heat exchangers that are not within the
scope of the AMG.
Section 3.6 of the AMG, Operating and Service History, which includes a review of NRC LERs,
NPRDS, NRC generic correspondence, and operating plant data, is considered applicable as used in
the development of aging evaluation logic.
This appendix endorses, with exceptions and clarifications (as detailed in Section 5 of this
appendix), Sections 1 through 4 of the AMG. Discussions regarding aging management programs,
which are presented in Section 5 of the AMG, have not been reviewed in detail. The generic results
and recommendations of Section 5 of the AMG may be of use to the users of these Mechanical
Tools in their discussion of plant-specific aging management programs; however, this appendix only
addresses the aging effects evaluation of heat exchangers.
Heat Exchangers-Appendix G 1-1
Many heat exchangers are utilized in cooling and environmental control systems with fluorocarbons
or another refrigerant as the working fluid. In general, fluorocarbons are non-corrosive to all
common metals except at very high temperatures. An uncontaminated fluorocarbons system will
not experience corrosive effects. However, the EPA is requiring the use of replacements for freon.
Some of the replacement gases are corrosive, flammable, and toxic. Any metal that is susceptible to
chloride induced pitting and SCC may exhibit degradation. If replacement gases are corrosive, then
the systems where they are used must be screened for potential aging effects. For heat exchangers
and cooling systems using fluorocarbons or other refrigerants, the applicant is referred to Appendix
D of these Mechanical Tools.
The aging effects for the external surfaces of the heat exchangers (e.g., shells and channels/headers)
are evaluated in Appendix E. The aging effects for the bolted closures (i.e., flanged connections and
bolting) are evaluated in Appendix F. The thermal fatigue related effects are evaluated in Appendix
H. Steam generators (PWR) have been extensively evaluated in other industry studies and therefore
are not in the scope of the AMG [1] or this appendix.
1.3 Purpose and Objective
The purpose and objectives of this appendix are to provide directions, exceptions, and/or
clarifications for using the AMG for heat exchangers to assist in the identification of aging effects of
heat exchangers defined to be within the scope of license renewal.
The appendix includes:
A summary guideline for using the AMG evaluations and this appendix
A summary of applications, materials, and environments covered by the AMG
A listing of the various BWR and PWR heat exchangers included within the AMG together
with the major tube/shell materials and the fluid environment assumed in the AMG
Exceptions and/or clarifications to the evaluation logic developed in the AMG
A summary of the AMG evaluation results in a material/environment format
Information necessary to evaluate heat exchangers within license renewal scope but not in
the AMG scope

2. GUIDANCE FOR HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATIONS
The Sandia Aging Management Guideline (AMG) for Heat Exchangers [1] provides a detailed
evaluation of the aging effects applicable to a specific set of heat exchangers. Based on various
inputs, a set of heat exchangers was identified in the AMG that 1) are within the scope of license
renewal, and 2) are expected to require aging management review under the license renewal rule
requirements. (Section 3.0 of this appendix provides a summary of the heat exchangers included in
the AMG evaluation.)
The Sandia AMG utilizes an approach similar to the other Mechanical Tool Appendices for
evaluating the effects of aging. The approach is a typical materials/environment evaluation where
the significance of specific aging effects is based on the materials used and the fluid environment to
which these materials are subjected. The AMG also makes assumptions concerning the design of
components, water chemistry of the various environments, and system parameters (such as flow
rates) during the evaluation of aging effects.
The AMG method is similar in approach to an aging management review that would be conducted if
the other appendices of these Mechanical Tools were applied to heat exchangers. Since the other
Mechanical Tool Appendices were not intended to address heat exchangers, the other appendices
differ slightly from the heat exchanger AMG with regard to the treatment of wear and fouling. In
the other Mechanical Tools, wear is considered the result of performance of an active function and is
not identified as an applicable aging mechanism, whereas the AMG treats wear as a significant
aging mechanism for some heat exchanger components. Wear and fretting on internal pressure
boundary surfaces is under review by the NRC and industry. The users of this tool should review
regulatory correspondence and industry technical reports, etc., after the issuance of this document to
determine if heat exchanger pressure boundary items should be evaluated for wear and fretting.
Fouling and its effect on heat transfer must be considered for license renewal. The AMG contains a
comprehensive treatment of fouling in heat exchangers and should be used to evaluate reduction of
heat transfer. The other Mechanical Tool Appendices do not address the heat transfer function.
An alternative to applying the Sandia AMG in its entirety is to perform the aging effects evaluation
using the other material/environment tools with additional consideration of wear and fouling as
aging effects. If this alternative is used, the sections in the AMG dealing with fouling and wear
provide excellent guidance to the identification of materials and subcomponents susceptible to
reduction of heat transfer, wear, and fouling. The AMG evaluates many material/environment
combinations and identifies all significant aging effects. The aging effects for the heat exchanger
subcomponents are described in detail in Section 4.3.2 of the AMG for the material and environment
combinations. Tables 6-2 through 6-7 of this appendix summarize the significant aging effects for
the heat exchangers identified in the AMG.
Section 4.3.2 of the AMG contains information that can be used to identify the aging effects of
specific material and environment combinations. However, caution must be used when applying the
summary of aging effects identified in Tables 4-3 through 4-8 of the AMG. The AMG tables
summarize the aging effects based on the environment and subcomponent only. When a
subcomponent has more than one material the aging effects for all materials are not identified in the
tables. In order to determine the aging effects of a specific heat exchanger material, it is necessary
to refer back to the written descriptions in Section 4.3.2. For example, AMG Table 4-7 identifies
general corrosion and IGSCC as significant for the tubes/coils in a raw water environment. Stainless
steel is susceptible to IGSCC in a raw water environment; however, it is not susceptible to general
corrosion in that environment. Conversely, carbon steel in a raw water environment is susceptible to
general corrosion but is not susceptible to IGSCC.
For those combinations which are not directly or indirectly covered by the AMG, an alternative
approach to identifying significant aging mechanisms must be used. If the logic developed in the
other Mechanical Tool Appendices is applied, wear and fouling must also be considered since the
logic for these aging effects is not included. The summary tables in Section 6 of this appendix
provide an indication of the materials and environment combinations for which wear and fouling
may be significant aging mechanisms.
There are two approaches that can be used to identify aging effects for heat exchangers, i.e., using
this appendix or the Sandia AMG. A third option is to use the other Mechanical Tool appendices for
a majority of the evaluation and to use this appendix and the AMG for the balance of the issues. All
three methods are described briefly below. Because of the many different materials and some
unique environment considerations, it may not be possible to identify all aging effects for all heat
exchangers using these methods. A small number of plant-specific applications may still require
independent aging effects evaluations. The tables in Section 6 of this document, combined with the
AMG and the other Mechanical Tools, should provide the information necessary to complete the
identification of applicable aging effects.
Depending on the heat exchanger design and materials of construction, one of the three methods to
identifying the significant aging effects for heat exchangers will be optimal. If the AMG heat
exchanger material, environment, and application match exactly the heat exchanger being evaluated,
the best way to evaluate aging will be to use the AMG. The second method is to use the modified
AMG summary tables in Section 6 of this appendix to identify the significant aging effects. This
second method is appropriate if the materials and environment are covered in the AMG evaluation
and included in these summary tables. Due to the generic nature of this data, some plant-specific
work may be required when using this option to provide consistency with the other Mechanical Tool
appendices. The third method, where the heat exchangers are evaluated using only these
Mechanical Tools, determines aging effects based on the materials and environments included
therein. This method may require significant additional work since some aging effects specific to
heat exchangers are not covered in the other Mechanical Tools.
An applicant may decide to use more than one method to evaluate the various heat exchangers.
Flexibility is a fundamental attribute of this tool.
Method 1: Evaluations for Specific Heat Exchangers Using the AMG
The AMG evaluates specific heat exchangers, environments, and materials. Before using the AMG
the following inputs must be compiled: materials of construction, fluid or air environment (based on
the AMG classifications), and the heat exchanger design. When there is an exact match to a heat
exchanger in the AMG, the results of the AMG aging effects identification are valid. The summary
tables for the environments and heat exchanger components listed in the AMG Tables 4-3 through
4-8 may identify aging effects that do not apply to a specific application because all significant
aging effects for all materials are listed. The AMG must be reviewed to screen out those aging
effects that are not applicable for a particular material or a particular application. The list of
exceptions/clarifications and cautions in Section 5 of this appendix should be reviewed to assure
consistency with the other Mechanical Tools.
Method 2: Use the Material/Environment Tables in Section 6 of This Appendix
The tables included in Section 6 of this appendix summarize the aging effects evaluations in the
AMG but are presented in a material/environment format. (These tables present the AMG results in
a form that is consistent with the Mechanical Tool approach to aging effects identification.) As in
Method 1, the materials of construction, specific environments, and application must be identified
prior to using the tables. The summary tables in Section 6 can then be used to identify the
significant aging effects for the combination of materials and environments being evaluated. The
exceptions/clarifications/cautions contained in Section 5 of this appendix should be reviewed and
aging effects modified (if necessary) to assure consistency with the overall Mechanical Tool
approach. An advantage to using this method is that the review is not limited specifically to the
applications, materials, and environment combinations contained in the AMG. However, there may
still be some heat exchangers and or specific aging effects that cannot be completely evaluated using
these summary tables. Plant-specific evaluations may then be required to identify the significant
aging effects.
Method 3: Use the Mechanical Tools to Identify Aging Effects
These Mechanical Tools provide a logic to identify significant aging effects for material and
environment combinations. These same tools can be used to evaluate heat exchangers. However,
not all materials, environments, and aging effects are evaluated in the Mechanical Tools. The AMG
in these cases can provide information and evaluations of some of the materials and effects not
covered in the other Mechanical Tool logics. Wear and fouling of heat exchanger components are
examples of mechanisms that are not included in the other Mechanical Tools. Some of the logic in
the Mechanical Tools, although applicable to heat exchangers, may have to be interpreted
differently. For example, pitting and crevice corrosion require stagnant or low flow conditions. In
some heat exchanger applications there may be areas of low flow even when system flow is high.
There may not be any single approach that deals adequately with all heat exchangers. There may
also be some exceptions that will require plant-specific aging effects identification since they are not
covered by any of the three approaches (none of the approaches, for example, cover refrigerant lines
and coils in air conditioners). However, using one or more of these approaches should provide
acceptable results for most of the heat exchangers requiring aging management review.

3. AMG HEAT EXCHANGERS EVALUATED
The Sandia AMG provides evaluations of aging effects for limited applications, materials, and
environments. Heat exchangers falling outside these specific applications can be evaluated using
information contained in the AMG; however, a more detailed approach is required and the summary
tables of the AMG may be of limited use. The important criterion, as in all the aging evaluations
contained in these appendices, is to determine the specific material and environment and perform the
aging effects evaluation using the sources of information or tools available.
Table 3-1 summarizes the combinations of materials and environments that are considered in the
AMG and are applicable to both BWRs and PWRs. The combinations of materials and
environments included in the AMG comprise a majority of the plant-specific heat exchangers that
require aging management review under the license renewal requirements. There are likely to be
many heat exchangers, however, that are not specifically included in the AMG evaluation. Table 3-
1 provides a summary of the specific heat exchangers covered in the AMG. Even if a plant-specific
application is not included, the summary of aging effects for similar heat exchangers and/or
applications (i.e., identical materials and environments on the tube and shell side) should enable
most heat exchangers to be evaluated with very little, if any, additional review necessary.
Table 3-1 was prepared utilizing the information contained in the following sections of the AMG:
1) Section 3.4.5, Description of Predominant Types of Heat Exchangers, 2) Table 3-5, Process and
Cooling Fluid Media BWR Heat Exchangers, and 3) Table 3-6, Process and Cooling Fluid Media
PWR Heat Exchangers. It represents all the materials, environments, and types of coolers that are
evaluated in the AMG. This table provides a summary and easy reference for the material and
environment combinations considered in the AMG. Using this information, it is easy to discern that
no heat exchangers evaluated in the AMG contain raw water on the shell side of the heat exchanger.
That application is, therefore, not considered in the AMG and aging effects are not identified.
Table 3-1 Heat Exchangers Evaluated by the AMG
MATERIAL FLUID
Tube/Shell Tube Side Shell Side Tube Side Shell Side
RWCU Regen.
(BWR)
SS SS Primary Primary
RWCU Non-
Regen. (BWR)
SS CS Primary Closed
Letdown Hx SS CS Primary Closed Cooling
HP Gland Seal
Cond (BWR)
SS CS Treated Primary
Seal Return
Cooler
SS CS Primary Closed Cooling
Spent Fuel Pool
Cooler
SS CS Treated Closed Cooling
Component
Cooling Water
Hx
SS, Admiralty,
90-10 /Cu-Ni,
Alum-Brass
CS Raw Closed Cooling
Residual Heat
Removal
(PWR)
SS CS or CS w/SS
overlay
Primary or
Borated

Closed Cooling
Residual Heat
Removal
(BWR)

SS

CS

Raw

Primary
Emer. Diesel
Gen. J acket
Cooling
Admiralty,
Copper Alloys
CS Raw Treated or Closed
Cooling
Lube Oil (EDG,
HPCI, RCIC)
Admiralty,
Copper Alloys
SS
CS Treated Water or
Raw Water

Lubricating Oil
Misc. Oil
Coolers
Admiralty,
Copper Alloys
CS Closed Cooling Lubricating
Oil

Fin/Coil Coil Side Open Side Coil Side Open Side
Containment/
Drywell Air
Coolers
Copper or 90-10
Cu-Ni
Alum., Copper, or
90-10 Cu-Ni
CCW, Service,
Raw, or Chilled
Containment or
Drywell Atmos.
ECCS
Room
Coolers
Copper or 90-10
Copper
Nickel
Alum., Copper,
or 90-10 Cu-Ni
Raw or Closed
Cooling
Air

The fluid environments identified in the AMG differ only slightly from the environments considered
in the other Mechanical Tool appendices. The Mechanical Tools do not address PWR primary water
as it is addressed specifically in a separate Reactor Coolant System AMG. The remaining water
systems are categorized as either treated or raw water. The raw water category in the AMG and as
used in these tools are the same. The treated water category in these Mechanical Tools includes
both the treated and closed cooling water as defined in the AMG. The difference between treated
and closed cooling systems as evaluated in the AMG is the addition of corrosion inhibitors and/or
biocides to the closed cooling water. Both treated and closed cooling water as addressed in the
AMG are considered to contain filtered and demineralized but not deaerated water. As in these
Mechanical Tools, the AMG classifies the borated spent fuel pool water in PWRs as treated water.
Primary Water
This refers to reactor coolant which has been deaerated/deoxygenated. This water may contain up to
200 ppb dissolved oxygen. Primary water in PWR plants also contains a borated solution. During
refueling outages aerated primary coolant can have dissolved oxygen contents above 8 ppm when
the reactor vessel head is removed for refueling. However, refueling outages are usually brief,
temperatures are low, and halogen levels are still controlled to below the threshold values. No
pitting or crevice corrosion has been observed in reactor internals under these conditionsas a result
of extended outages. Therefore crevice corrosion is not expected during refueling outages.
Treated Water
This refers to water which has been filtered and demineralized but generally not deaerated. The
water may contain up to 5 ppm dissolved oxygen and small amounts of chemicals (i.e., potassium
chromate, and sodium nitrite) for process use. The spent fuel pool water in PWR plants contains
2000 to 2500 ppm boron.
Closed Cooling Water
This refers to treated water containing corrosion inhibitors and biocides.
Lubricating Oil
This refers to low to medium viscosity hydrocarbons used for bearing gear and engine lubrication.
Air
This refers to the surrounding ambient air of various rooms, containment, or the drywell. Air-side
filters are typically provided to remove particulates from the air stream.
Raw Water
This refers to water entering a plant from a river, lake, pond, or bay, which has not been chemically
treated or demineralized. In general, the water has been rough-filtered to remove large particles and
contains biocidal additives for microorganism control. The sodium chloride content in lake or river
water is typically less than 1,000 mg/l, while either ocean or brackish water has a sodium chloride
content of greater than 1,000 mg/l.
4. HEAT EXCHANGERS IN THE SCOPE OF LICENSE RENEWAL
The extent to which plants rely on balance of plant (BOP) equipment for compliance with license
renewal rule requirements determines which equipment falls within the scope of license renewal.
Some plants may designate very little BOP equipment as being within the license renewal scope
under its CLB. Other plants may take credit for BOP equipment to meet regulated events or design
basis events. For example, if the main condenser is used as a source of water to demonstrate
compliance with a design basis event or a regulated event (e.g., LOCA and Appendix R), then the
main condenser may require AMR.
Heat exchangers are devices that transfer heat to establish or maintain a desired process or
equipment temperatures. Several heat exchanger types are used in nuclear power plants, many
serving as interfaces between plant systems. The major heat exchanger types utilized in nuclear
power plants are the shell-and-tube heat exchanger, which can be shell-and-U-tube or shell-and-
straight-tube, and the fin-coil cooling units. The boundaries of the evaluation for shell-and-tube heat
exchangers are defined by the shell and channel head and their nozzles for piping attachments. For
fin-coil heat exchangers, the boundaries of the evaluation are defined by the coil (tube) headers and
their nozzles for piping attachments. Each heat exchanger can be broken down into subassemblies
and components [1].
The following is a standard description of the heat exchanger components addressed in this
appendix:
Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers
Channel Head also known as waterbox, end bell, bonnet, or head includes nozzles, covers,
and a divider (partition) plate(s)
Tube Sheet(s) also known as tube plate(s)
Tubes
Shell also known as case includes nozzles, covers
Shell Side Internals includes various subcomponents such as impingement plates, tie rods,
baffles/partitions, and support plates
Fin-Coil Heat Exchangers (used for containment or room cooling)
Coil (Tube) Headers includes nozzles
Coil(s) tube(s) that may be finned for external air flow
The following list of heat exchangers identifies typical heat exchangers that can be identified as
within the scope of license renewal. This list is not complete, but is included to emphasize the
variety of heat exchangers that are expected to require aging management review. Some of these
heat exchangers will be exact matches in application, material, and environment to those evaluated
in the AMG; others will require additional work to assure that all aging effects are identified. The
list is broken down into two distinct types of heat exchangers. The shell-and-tube heat exchangers
have fluids on both the tube and shell sides. The fin-coil type heat exchangers are used for
containment or room cooling. Air flows across a baffled tube bundle in these coolers with a cooling
fluid on the tube side. For these fin-coil heat exchangers there is no shell side, as the tubes are open
to the air flow.
Shell-and-Tube Type
Residual Heat Removal Coolers
Reactor/Seal Return Letdown Coolers (PWR)
RWCU Regenerative and Non-Regenerative (BWR)
Emergency Diesel J acket Water Coolers
Makeup Pump Coolers
Reactor Building Spray Pump J acket Coolers
Residual Heat Removal Pump J acket Coolers
Station Blackout Diesel Heat Exchangers
Fire Pump Coolers
Post Accident Sampling Coolers
Electrical Room Chiller Unit Condensers
Reactor Coolant Pump Thermal Barriers (PWR)
RC Drain Tank Heat Exchanger (PWR)
Pump Lube Oil Coolers
Main Condensers
RCP Upper and Lower Oil Coolers (PWR)
Generator Thrust Bearing and Guide Bearing Coolers
Spent Fuel Coolers
Component Cooling Water Coolers
Service Water Coolers
Raw Water Coolers
Diesel Generator Standby Heaters
Fin-Coil Type
Reactor Building Coolers
Drywell Coolers
Emergency Core Cooling System Room Coolers
Control Room Coolers
Electrical Equipment Room Coolers
RCP Motor Air Coolers (PWR)
Air Conditioners
Diesel Generator Radiators
Even where specific heat exchanger applications are addressed, the AMR can sometimes require
plant-specific evaluations. For example, the decay heat or residual heat removal coolers will require
AMR at all plants. However, the material used for construction, the design parameters, and the tube
and shell side environment may differ from plant to plant. The conditions covered in the AMG do
not include an evaluation of raw water on the shell side of the decay heat removal coolers. A plant
that has raw water on the shell side would, therefore, have to perform additional evaluations to
complete the identification of aging effects if using the AMG and this appendix.
While evaluating heat exchangers using the Sandia AMG, the basis and assumptions must be
completely understood before using the results of the aging effects evaluations. When conditions
and assumptions for the heat exchanger being evaluated are an exact match with those in the AMG,
the results are valid. Where the conditions and/or assumptions do not exactly match, more
evaluation is necessary to assure the results.
Also, additional heat exchangers may be in the scope of license renewal because their failure could
result in leakage, flooding, or wetting of safety-related components. However, such heat exchangers
are not addressed in the AMG, and can be evaluated using the other Mechanical Tools, since heat
transfer is not required from such heat exchangers for license renewal considerations.

5. EXCEPTIONS/CLARIFICATIONS/CAUTIONS
1. As is the case in the other Mechanical Tools, credit for an aspect of a plant program is not
implicitly credited with precluding the occurrence of an aging effect/mechanism. For example,
corrosion inhibitors prevent general corrosion of carbon steel, but general corrosion is an
applicable aging mechanism and the program which adds and monitors corrosion inhibitor
concentrations may be explicitly credited with managing the effects of aging, as described in
2. In Sections 4.3.1.5.4 and 4.3.2 of the AMG, the discussions conclude that microorganisms are
present in treated and closed cooling water systems. Although the AMG describes closed
cooling water as containing corrosion inhibitors and biocides, the discussions of MIC indicate
that for treated or closed cooling water, the potential exists for the presence of MIC. While the
Mechanical Tools logic identifies MIC as a concern for treated water, it is only a concern if the
treated water has been contaminated, such as from an outside source, from temporary
alignments, or from an interfacing system that contains water from a natural or open source.
3. The evaluations of closed water systems also in the AMG do not consistently apply the addition
of corrosion inhibitors. General corrosion is deemed a significant aging mechanism in closed
water systems (assumed to contain corrosion inhibitors), yet the discussions for galvanic
corrosion indicate that the inclusion of corrosion inhibitors limits this type of corrosion.
4. During the evaluation of aging effects in heat exchangers, consideration is often given in the
AMG to common design aspects of heat exchangers such as sacrificial anodes and surface
coatings to control aging. The aging evaluation takes credit for these design attributes, often
without qualification. It is incumbent on a user of this tool to ensure the continued integrity of
such design attributes in order to apply the conclusions drawn in the AMG.
The AMG interpretation of thermal embrittlement and creep for the different heat exchanger
materials of construction should be examined carefully. The initial screening logic temperature
threshold used in the AMG for creep and thermal embrittlement for all heat exchangers is
200
o
F. The heat exchangers exceeding this temperature threshold (letdown, excess letdown,
RWCU regenerative and seal water heat exchanger) were further evaluated with stainless steel
and titanium being the only materials exceeding the temperature threshold for any extended
period. The subsequent evaluation concluded that titanium and stainless steel were not
susceptible to creep or thermal embrittlement. The evaluation also indicated that CASS is
susceptible to thermal embrittlement, but that none of the heat exchangers evaluated contained
cast austenitic stainless steel.
The conclusion drawn in the AMG (i.e., creep and thermal embrittlement are not applicable) is
likely a valid conclusion based on the logic in the Mechanical Tools. To be consistent with the
other Mechanical Tools (appendices), creep of metals is not a concern at PWR or BWR plant
temperatures and should be eliminated from consideration for that reason. Thermal
embrittlement of cast austenitic stainless steel is a concern if the equipment is operated at high
temperatures. The treated water tool (Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools) uses a threshold
temperature of 482
o
F above which cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS) is susceptible to
thermal embrittlement.
5. In the AMG carbon steel is evaluated in a primary water application only for a BWR
application. This evaluation should not be extrapolated to a PWR primary water environment
which contains boric acid.
6. Section 4.3.1.6.1 of the AMG states, IGSCC has been reported for stainless and high alloy
steel components exposed to borated water service applications (PWR applications). Therefore,
if the heat exchanger components are stainless or high alloy steel and exposed to borated fluids,
then IGSCC is a significant aging mechanism. This conclusion is contrary to the Mechanical
Tool for treated water and the RCS aging evaluation. Failures attributed to IGSCC have been
reported (e.g., IN 79-19); however, those failures were attributed to other contaminants such as
chlorides and thiosulfate, and not boric acid. The treated water tool (Appendix A) should be
consulted to determine the threshold values for oxygen and contaminant levels above which
SCC may be a concern.
7. The heat exchanger AMG states that mechanical fatigue is a significant aging mechanism for all
heat exchanger components regardless of materials and operating history. The remainder of the
Mechanical Tools treat high cycle fatigue as a plant-specific phenomenon to be included as an
aging effect dependent on the AMR approach employed. The AMG determinations should be
followed because of the thermal stresses and cycles experienced by heat exchanger components.
8. Raw water was not evaluated as an environment on the shell side of the heat exchangers in the
AMG since no such applications were identified in which that situation existed. The B&W
PWR plants contain at least one heat exchanger where raw water flows on the shell side. The
AMG does evaluate the various materials of interest on the shell side in a raw water
environment and the tables in Section 6 of this appendix list those applicable aging effects.
9. Pitting is an aging mechanism that is only prevalent in stagnant or low flowing conditions. The
AMG identifies pitting as a concern only in a raw water environment and without regard to
flow conditions. Because of the design and configuration of most heat exchangers, stagnant and
low flow areas likely exist even during system flow conditions. Caution should be used if
attempting to rule out pitting based on flow conditions.
10. The logic as to conditions conducive to pitting and crevice corrosion contained in the
Mechanical Tools differs from the AMG discussions. The Mechanical Tools assume that the
necessary conditions for pitting and crevice corrosion can exist in raw, treated, and closed
cooling water systems. The treated water tool (Appendix A) establishes minimum contaminant
(such as a halide or sulfate) and oxygen concentrations necessary for pitting and/or crevice
corrosion to be a concern. The raw water tool (Appendix B) assumes that contaminants are
present and does not include minimum concentrations in the aging effects logic. The AMG
considers pitting and crevice corrosion to be significant only in raw water systems. The AMG
considers both treated and closed cooling water not to be conducive to the propagation of
pitting or crevice corrosion. The AMG takes credit for the water quality control programs to
prevent pitting and crevice corrosion in treated and closed cooling water systems.
To provide consistency with the Mechanical Tools, pitting and crevice corrosion should be
evaluated in accordance with the treated water and raw water logic contained in Appendices A
and B, respectively, of these Mechanical Tools.
11. The discussion in item 9 is also applicable to the AMG discussions on SCC. The AMG
assumes that the treated and closed cooling system environments are not conducive to SCC. No
basis for that assertion is provided and it is in disagreement with the treated water tool
(Appendix A). In this treated water tool, SCC is a plausible aging mechanism for stainless steel
in treated or closed water systems containing contaminants and/or oxygen concentrations above
the identified thresholds. Additionally, some microorganisms convert nitrites to nitrates. The
use of nitrite corrosion inhibitors in the presence of these microorganisms could potentially lead
to nitrate-induced stress corrosion cracking in carbon and low-alloy steel.
As in the pitting and crevice corrosion discussion in item 9, SCC should be evaluated in
accordance with the treated water and raw water logic contained in Appendices A and B,
respectively, of these Mechanical Tools.
12. The significance of galvanic corrosion as an aging mechanism is, in most cases, left unqualified
in the AMG. The AMG states:
Galvanic corrosion may be significant when, given a corrosive environment such as raw or
treated water, two materials in close proximity are far apart on the galvanic series chart. In
these situations, if sacrificial anodes or cathodic protection is not utilized, the more anodic
material may experience significant galvanic corrosion.
Galvanic corrosion, by this definition, is only considered significant for treated water and raw
water systems. The AMG deems the addition of corrosion inhibitors sufficient to preclude
galvanic corrosion in closed cooling water systems. The treated water Mechanical Tool does
not credit the addition of corrosion inhibitors as a method of prevention for the effects of
galvanic corrosion. Although corrosion inhibitors may limit the susceptibility of materials to
galvanic corrosion, improper treatment can actually increase the corrosive environment and
thus increase the corrosion rate (Reference 2, Page 73). To provide consistency with the other
tools, the treated water tool (Appendix A) should be used for galvanic corrosion evaluations of
AMG classified closed cooling water systems.
In Table 6-5 (Section 6), galvanic corrosion of carbon and low-alloy steel on the shell side of
heat exchangers is identified as a significant aging mechanism. The AMG makes this assertion
based on the applications where stainless steel on the primary side is matched with carbon steel
on the shell side. While it may be true that under these conditions carbon or low-alloy steel
may be in contact with stainless steel tubes or tubesheets, construction and design practices will
typically make provisions for these types of situations. Either welding materials, sacrificial
anodes, or isolation devices will likely be used to prevent galvanic corrosion where dissimilar
materials are in contact. The use of these design practices is included in the AMG with the
distinction made that galvanic corrosion is only a significant aging mechanism if this type of
design protection is not included. Sacrificial anodes are a method to prevent significant
corrosion of the heat exchanger material. However, it is incumbent upon an applicant to have
in place a program to inspect or otherwise assure the integrity of these sacrificial anodes. If an
installed sacrificial anode has been depleted or becomes unattached, it will no longer protect the
component, and severe corrosion may follow.
13. Oil is only evaluated on the shell side of the heat exchangers in the AMG. Since oil is usually a
non-corrosive environment and flow rates for oil containing systems are typically low, the
extrapolation of significant aging effects to the tubes, tubesheet, and waterbox are made for oil
environments. Fouling is identified as a significant aging effect for oil systems where the oil
source is the bottom of a tank or reservoir. This could lead to corrosion products or
contamination of the oil supply. Such contamination could also result in some forms of
corrosion; however, none are found to be applicable. If the oil source is from the bottom of a
reservoir or tank, the applicability of corrosion aging effects should be evaluated further.
14. Erosion is not covered in the Mechanical Tools specifically as it applies to heat exchangers.
The discussions of this aging effect as it pertains to heat exchangers are, therefore, limited to
the evaluations in the AMG. Since the AMG specifically evaluates the various subcomponents
and environments for only those applications within the scope of the AMG, not all materials,
environments, and applications are evaluated. (Raw water, for example, is evaluated on the
tube side but not on the shell side of heat exchangers.) The materials evaluated on the tube side
of heat exchangers are similar to the materials on the shell side and, with the exception of flow
conditions, the susceptibility of the material to erosion is no different.
The AMG includes consideration of a select group of heat exchangers and the identification of
aging effects is limited to that select set. Plant-specific requirements and applications will
require aging management review of heat exchangers that are not included in the AMG. If
using the AMG as a tool to identify aging effects for heat exchangers outside the AMG scope,
all assumptions and operating conditions assumed in the AMG for the evaluation must be
verified. Even where there appears to be an exact match with a heat exchanger covered in the
AMG, a review of the AMG assumptions and operating conditions considered may be
necessary to completely remove erosion as a concern. The AMG specifically identifies the
included heat exchanger designs, manufacturer, materials used, operating conditions assumed,
etc. If a plant-specific application violates any of the AMG evaluation criteria, the conclusions
may no longer be valid. Statements similar to ...as long as the heat exchangers are not
subjected to temperatures above... and most plants treat closed cooling water with corrosion
inhibitors, as long as an inhibitor is used then this aging effect is not a concern are found in the
AMG. The erosion evaluation makes similar assumptions and statements. Heat exchanger tube
plugging and changes in system and equipment operation can change internal flowpaths and
fluid velocities such that fluid velocities fall outside those assumed in the AMG.
Erosion becomes a concern where previously it was not. The summary tables in Section 6
contain summary notes of the erosion evaluations in the AMG.
15. Section 4.3.2.1.4 of the AMG erroneously makes the statement that inhibited admiralty brass
contains less than 15% zinc and is not susceptible to IGSCC and/or TGSCC. Inhibited
admiralty brass contains 28% zinc and is susceptible to SCC. The inhibited admiralty brass
provides resistance to dezincification but not SCC.
16. The AMG lists numerous NRC Bulletins, Notices, Generic Letters, and Circulars applicable to
the in-scope heat exchangers. It does not include discussion of NRC Circular 80-11,
Emergency Diesel Generator Lube Oil Cooler Failures, specifically, pressure boundary
failures that occurred as a result of severe corrosion of the tube to tubesheet solder joint in oil
coolers manufactured by EMD of General Motors. This corrosion resulted from the
combination of soft solder in a raw water environment and in the presence of Calgon CS, a
borated-nitrite type inhibitor. Calgon CS should not be used in situations where the solder joint
composition is a soft solder of lead-tin composition. Although this issue has likely been
addressed at plants due to the date of the Circular, corrosion of this solder joint is a significant
aging mechanism for these specific coolers under the conditions identified and should be
considered during the aging evaluation.

6. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM HEAT EXCHANGER AMG
The Sandia Aging Management Guideline for Heat Exchangers (AMG) evaluates numerous heat
exchangers that are constructed of various materials exposed to a variety of different environments.
However, the AMG does not evaluate all material/ environment combinations.
In addition to materials and environments, heat exchangers are discussed in the AMG on a
subcomponent basis. Because of the number of variables involved, not all combinations of
materials, environments, and subcomponents are evaluated. The AMG limits its evaluation to those
applications covered by the in-scope heat exchangers. No AMG heat exchanger applications, for
example, have raw water on the shell side; therefore, this combination is not included. The
evaluation of the primary water only includes stainless steel and titanium (carbon steel is evaluated
only for a very specific and limited duration situation in BWRs).
Although not all combinations of materials, environments, and subcomponents are evaluated, as is
shown in Table 6-1, most of the material/environments combinations are evaluated. The results of
the material/environment evaluations for the covered subcomponents are easily extrapolated to the
other subcomponents (for example, the significant aging effects using raw water on the shell side of
heat exchangers have been extrapolated using information contained in the AMG). Where results
are component specific or system condition specific (such as FAC), additional work may be required
to complete the aging effects identification.
Table 6-1 Materials/Environment Combinations Evaluated in AMG

MATERIAL
PRIMARY
WATER
TREATED
WATER
CLOSED
COOLING
WATER
RAW
WATER
LUBE
OIL
CONTAIN.
ATMOS.
Stainless Steel
and High
Alloy Steel
X X X X X X
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel
X X X X X X
Copper, Cu-
Ni Alloys,
Muntz Metal
X X X X X
Inhibited
Admiralty
Brass
X X X X X
Titanium X X X X X X
Aluminum X

The AMG evaluation of aging effects provides an in depth evaluation of a significant number of heat
exchangers within the scope of license renewal. The specific heat exchangers evaluated are
identified in Section 3 of this appendix. The methodology and approach used in the AMG is to first
evaluate the many aging mechanisms for the environments and materials within the scope of the
AMG. An initial screening of the aging mechanisms is performed which provides a determination
of susceptibility of the heat exchanger subcomponents to these aging mechanisms. A detailed aging
effects evaluation is then completed for the subcomponents to identify the significant aging
mechanisms for the materials and subcomponents.
The results of the aging mechanism evaluations are tabulated in the AMG Tables 4-3 through 4-8.
These tables summarize the significant aging effects that are applicable to the heat exchanger
subcomponents, each table representing a specific environment. Because of the many materials used
throughout the heat exchangers, applying these tables to a specific heat exchanger is difficult at best.
Since heat exchangers typically include two distinct environments, two tables are required. These
tables summarize the significant aging mechanisms for a particular subcomponent and, since many
materials are evaluated, not all identified aging effects may be applicable to the specific application
being evaluated. AMG Table 4-4 for treated water systems is an example of a situation in which
both stainless and carbon steel tubesheets are evaluated. This table indicates that in a treated water
environment general corrosion and stress corrosion cracking are both significant aging mechanisms
for tubesheets. This table does not indicate that general corrosion is only significant for carbon steel
and not for stainless steel, while stress corrosion cracking is only significant for stainless steel and
not carbon steel.
Although some exceptions do exist, the significant aging mechanisms identified are material and
environment specific. The detailed review of the AMG evaluation and summary of aging effects
supports this assertion. For example, general corrosion is a significant aging mechanism for carbon
steel in treated water but the material location within the heat exchanger is not relevant. Galvanic
corrosion, however, may be dependent on the particular subcomponent design, since the
susceptibility to galvanic corrosion is based on contact with different materials.
The tables below represent a summary of the AMG aging mechanism evaluation from a materials
and environment perspective. Where exceptions to the AMG are taken to provide consistency with
these Mechanical Tools, appropriate notes are included. Any subcomponent-specific information is
included as notes to these tables. Any conditions not following a typical material/environment
evaluation are also noted. Each table represents a specific environment, with significant aging
effects identified for the materials evaluated in the AMG.
Table 6-2 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Primary Water Environment
MATERIALS Thermal
Embrit.
Creep Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC Erosion
/ FAC
Wear Fouling
Stainless Steel X X X X
Carbon Steel X X X X
Titanium X X X
Notes:
1. Thermal embrittlement and creep are discussed in Section 5, item No. 4.
2. Stainless Steel is used for all PWR applications in a primary water environment. Carbon steel in a primary water environment only applies to BWR Residual
Heat Removal (RHR) and Gland Seal heat exchangers (the RHR heat exchanger can contain either treated or primary water). The other BWR heat exchangers
utilize stainless steel for primary water applications.
3. Stress Corrosion Cracking is discussed in Section 5, item No. 6.
4. Erosion / FAC. Primary water is fine filtered to remove particulate and de-ionized to achieve purity. It also contains corrosion inhibitors to minimize abrasive
corrosion products. Dissolved oxygen levels in primary water applications are controlled to minimize accumulation of abrasive corrosion products. As long as
the water chemistry is controlled and fluid velocities are maintained within specified limits, erosion for most heat exchanger components is not a significant
aging mechanism. Exceptions are the shell/nozzles/internals components. Normally the shell/nozzles/internals components are constructed of stainless steel in
high velocity applications; however, if they are constructed of carbon steel (as in the BWR RHR and Gland Seal condenser) and are exposed to fluid velocities
greater than 6 ft/sec then erosion is a significant aging mechanism. This minimum threshold velocity is in agreement with the raw water tool (Appendix B).
FAC is the increased loss of material caused by flow. The normally protective oxide film dissolves into the stream of flowing fluid. The material removal
process is considered to be one of oxide dissolution. Wear rates tend to increase with increasing bulk velocity.
5. Wear is identified as a significant aging mechanism for all tube and tubesheet materials and in all environments within the scope of the AMG.

Table 6-3 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Treated Water Environment
MATERIALS Thermal
Embrit.
Creep Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC Erosion
/ FAC
Wear Fouling
Stainless and
high alloy steel
X X X X
Carbon and low
alloy steel
X X X X X X X
Cu, Cu-alloys
Muntz metal
X See
Note 2
X See
Note 5
X X X
Inhibited Adm.
Brass
X X X X X X
Titanium X X X X
Notes:
1. Thermal embrittlement and creep are discussed in Section 5, Item No. 4.
2. Muntz metal (and other copper alloys with greater than 15% zinc) are susceptible to selective leaching (dezincification) in a treated water environment.
Inhibited admiralty brass provides resistance to dezincification based on 1% tin content.
3. Galvanic corrosion is discussed in Section 5, Item No. 12. Raw water on the shell side is not specifically addressed in the AMG since no heat exchangers in the
scope of the AMG contain raw water on the shell side. At least one application has been identified in which raw water flows through the shell side of the RHR
heat exchangers. The treated water evaluations indicate that galvanic corrosion is a significant aging mechanism for shell/nozzle/internals and
waterbox/channel head/divider plate subcomponents where materials used are not close together on the galvanic chart and where sacrificial anodes or cathodic
protection is not provided. This same logic would apply to a raw water environment.
4. MIC can attack any material but is only a significant aging mechanism for treated water systems if the treated water has been contaminated, such as from an
interfacing system that contains raw water, and a biocide is not used. The use of nitrite corrosion inhibitors (>10,000 ppm) in the presence of some
microorganisms could potentially lead to nitrate-induced stress corrosion cracking.
5. Stress Corrosion Cracking is a significant aging mechanism for copper alloys with greater than 15% zinc content. Muntz metal contains approximately 40% zinc.
6. Erosion / FAC. Treated water applications contain fine corrosion products that will collect at the bottom of tanks and reservoirs. These particles are highly
abrasive and can be pumped into the various heat exchanger components. Treated water also is considered to be a corrosive fluid owing to its high oxygen
content.
Tubes Treated water on the shell side was only evaluated for stainless steel with no significant effect identified.
Treated water on tube inside surfaces was evaluated. If tubes are made from copper nickel alloys or admiralty brass, erosion is a significant aging
mechanism based on high dissolved oxygen and potential particulate content.
Tubesheet If tubesheet is made from Muntz metal or carbon steel, erosion and FAC are significant aging mechanisms.
Shell Only the BWR RHR cooler is evaluated for shell side treated water. Erosion and FAC are not significant because operation is only intermittent in
that mode. However, the AMG in at least one place also lists HPCI gland seal condenser with shell side treated water. The same logic of
intermittent operation should also apply to that heat exchanger.
Waterbox If waterbox components are made from carbon steel, erosion and FAC is a significant aging mechanism.
7. Wear is a significant aging mechanism for all tube and tubesheet materials and in all environments within the scope of the AMG.
8. In treated water applications corrosion product particulates can accumulate at the bottom of tanks or reservoirs. Fouling is a significant aging mechanism where
the water supply originates at the bottom of a tank or reservoir.

Table 6-4 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Closed Cooling Water Environment
MATERIALS
Thermal
Embrit.
Creep
Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC
Erosion
/ FAC
Wear Fouling
Stainless and
high alloy steel
X X X
Carbon and
low alloy steel
X X X X X
Cu, Cu-alloys
Muntz metal
X See Note
2
X Note
5
X
Inhibited Adm.
Brass
X X X X
Titanium X X X
Notes:
2. Muntz metal (and other copper alloys with greater than 15% zinc) are susceptible to selective leaching (dezincification) in a closed cooling water environment.
(Inhibited admiralty brass is not susceptible due to 1% tin content which hinders deposition of copper.
3. Corrosion inhibitors are added to closed cooling systems. The AMG credits the addition of corrosion inhibitors as a means to minimize galvanic corrosion
effects.
4. MIC is a significant aging mechanism for closed cooling water systems if the water has become contaminated, such as such as from an interfacing system
containing raw water, and a biocide is not used. The use of nitrite corrosion inhibitors (>10,000 ppm) in the presence of some microorganisms could potentially
lead to nitrate-induced stress corrosion cracking in carbon and low-alloy steel.
5. Stress Corrosion Cracking is a significant aging mechanism for copper alloys with greater than 15% zinc content. Muntz metal contains approximately 40% zinc.
6. Erosion / FAC. Closed cooling water is fine filtered to remove particulate and deionized to achieve purity. It also contains corrosion inhibitors to minimize
abrasive corrosion products. As long as the water chemistry is controlled and fluid velocities are maintained within specified limits, erosion for most heat
exchanger components is not a significant aging mechanism. One exception is the shell/nozzles/internals components. Normally the shell/nozzles/internals
components are constructed of stainless steel in high velocity applications; however, if they are constructed of carbon steel and are exposed to fluid velocities
greater than 6 ft/sec then erosion is a significant aging mechanism (see Table 6-2, note 4). FAC is a mechanism by which fluid flow dissolves away the
protective oxide layer, causing increased corrosion and reoxidation. FAC rates are greatest at temperatures between 250 and 340F and in fluid conditions of pH
<9.5. Although FAC rates tend to increase with increasing bulk velocity, there is no practical velocity threshold below which FAC does not occur. Under these
conditions, FAC is a significant aging mechanisms.
Table 6-5 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Raw Water Environment
MATERIALS
Thermal
Embrit.
Creep
Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC
Erosion
Wear Fouling
Stainless and
high alloy steel
X X X X X X
Carbon and
low alloy steel
X X X X X X X X
Cu, Cu-alloys
Muntz metal
X X X X X X X X X
Inhibited Adm.
Brass
X X X X X X X X X
Titanium X X X X
Notes:
2. General corrosion of copper nickel or inhibited admiralty tubes is a significant aging mechanism if operation of the heat exchanger is cyclic.
General corrosion of carbon and low-alloy steel in a raw water environment is a significant aging mechanism. Although raw water was not evaluated on the
shell side of heat exchangers, various other components (e.g., tubesheet, waterbox) are evaluated in this environment.
General corrosion in the form of selective leaching (dezincification) of Muntz metal tube sheets is a significant aging mechanism.
3. Pitting is a significant aging mechanism for all materials with the exception of titanium. Pitting is not a concern for titanium or its alloys. The susceptibility to
pitting is dependent on contaminants, oxygen, and fluid velocity. Section 4.3.2.1.3 of the AMG contains threshold velocities for several materials. Due to the
cyclic operating nature of many heat exchangers and the complex fluid flow paths, it is likely that all heat exchangers will experience flow rates below these
threshold values at various locations even under full flow conditions.
4. The AMG credits good design practices with preventing the occurrence of galvanic corrosion for the tubes and tubesheet material. Where necessary, sacrificial
anodes or cathodic protection are utilized and galvanic corrosion is not a concern. Raw water on the shell side is not specifically addressed in the AMG since
no heat exchangers in the scope of the AMG contain raw water on the shell side. There is at least one application where raw water flows through the shell side
of the RHR heat exchangers. The treated water evaluations indicate that galvanic corrosion is a significant aging mechanism for shell/nozzle/internals and
waterbox/channel head/divider plate subcomponents where materials used are not close together on the galvanic chart and where sacrificial anodes or cathodic
protection is not provided. This same logic applies to a raw water environment.
5. Microbiologically induced corrosion is a significant aging mechanism for all materials in a raw water environment. Plant-specific use of biocides to prevent
MIC is performed at some plants. This would reduce the susceptibility to MIC damage. The use of nitrite corrosion inhibitors in the presence of some
microorganisms could potentially lead to nitrate-induced stress corrosion cracking in carbon and low-alloy steel.
6. Stress corrosion cracking is a significant aging mechanism for stainless steel and copper alloys containing greater than 15% zinc. Muntz metal (40% zinc) and
inhibited admiralty brass (28% zinc) are susceptible to SCC.
7. Erosion
Raw water applications contain fine particles such as sand and silt that pass through the rough screens. These particles are highly abrasive and raw water is
considered to be a corrosive fluid. Erosion of many heat exchanger materials in this environment is a significant aging mechanism.
The AMG identified no application in which raw water was on the shell side of the heat exchangers. Although not specifically evaluated, the susceptibility of
the shell side erosion can be extrapolated using the tube, tubesheet, and waterbox evaluations.
Tubes Admiralty brass and copper nickel alloys are susceptible to erosion.
Tubesheet Carbon steel and Muntz metal are susceptible to erosion.
Shell/Nozzle/Internals Carbon/low-alloy steel are susceptible.
Waterbox/Channel Head/Divider Plate Carbon/low-alloy steel are susceptible.

Table 6-6 Significant Aging Mechanisms for a Lubricating Oil Environment
MATERIALS Thermal
Embrit.
Creep Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC Erosion
/ FAC
Wear Fouling
Stainless and
high alloy steel
X X X
Carbon and
low alloy steel
X X X
Cu, Cu-alloys
Muntz metal
X X X
Inhibited Adm.
Brass
X X X
Titanium X X X
Notes:
1. All heat exchangers evaluated operate with oil on the shell side. The AMG bases aging effects identification on strict controls for the quality and purity of the
lubricating oil and the fact that they are regularly checked. The AMG assumes that very little corrosion occurs in lubricating oil systems because oxygen content is
low, oils are not good electrolytes, and purification systems are generally installed and/or corrosion inhibitors added to maintain the oil free of corrosion products.
3. Mechanical fatigue is assumed for all materials and all environments in heat exchanger applications.
4. Galvanic corrosion is not a significant aging mechanism. According to the AMG even contaminated-condition oils are not good electrolytes.
5. MIC is not a significant aging mechanism. AMG basis is that even in the contaminated condition, oils do not support microorganism growth. This is
contradictory to the oil/fuel oil tool (Appendix C) which assumes that contaminated oil may contain moisture and microorganisms.
6. SCC is not a significant aging mechanism. AMG basis is that the operating environment and temperatures do not support the mechanisms. This is also
contradictory to the oil tool logic which assumes that moisture may be present and could initiate SCC.
7. Neither erosion nor flow-accelerated (FAC) corrosion are significant aging mechanisms. FAC occurs when the base material is susceptible to general corrosion
in fluid environments. This is not the case with an oil environment. Additionally, the low flow rates and low contaminant levels in these systems do not support
particulate flow erosion.
9. Fouling is a significant aging mechanism in oil applications where the source of oil is the bottom of a tank or reservoir and, therefore, could result in the
carryover of particulate matter. All oil applications in the AMG have the lubricating oil on the shell side of the heat exchanger. The shell material is carbon or
low-alloy steel while the tube material may consist of any of the materials listed in the table (except carbon and low-alloy steel).
6-10
Table 6-7 Significant Aging Mechanisms for an Air Environment
MATERIALS
Thermal
Embrit.
Creep
Mech.
Fatigue
General
Cor.
Pitting
Cor.
Galvanic
Cor.
MIC SCC
Erosion
/ FAC
Wear Fouling
Stainless and
high alloy steel
X X X
Cu, Cu-alloys
Muntz metal
X X X
Inhibited Adm.
Brass
X X X
Titanium X X X
Aluminum,
Aluminum
Alloys
X X X
4. The removal of the material oxide layer will only occur when the component wall is continuously wetted. Therefore, FAC does not occur in air systems. Due
to the flow rates and contamination conditions, erosion is not an applicable mechanism in a nuclear plant air system.
6. Materials for the tube side and exterior tubesheet were not well defined in the AMG for all the air coolers. As a result, corrosive effects on the tubes, tube
baffles, and exterior of the tube sheets may not be adequately evaluated.
7. Fouling of the air side can occur from the accumulation and build up of dust, dirt, and debris on and between the fins of open coil/fin type coolers.
2. Air coolers evaluated are all open coil/fin type coolers. Therefore, no tube side or shell side considerations are made.
3. Mechanical fatigue is assumed for all materials and all environments in heat exchanger applications.
Heat Exchangers-Appendix G
Notes:

7. COMPARISON TO GALL HEAT EXCHANGER ITEMS
mechanical components. GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII all include items for heat exchangers
addressed by this tool. GALL Chapter IV items for heat exchangers addressed by this tool are
limited to isolation condenser components. The identification and evaluation of aging management
programs (AMPs) is outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific
basis, as described in Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in
Tables 7-1 through 7-7, with the following component, material, environment, aging effect, and
aging mechanism considerations.
As described in Section 1.2 above, steam generators (PWR) are not in the scope of the AMG and are
not addressed in this appendix. Corresponding GALL Chapter IV items in Sections IV.D1 and
IV.D2 are also not addressed. Refer to Appendix A of this document for pertinent discussions. The
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items that are applicable to this tool include the following as the
Structure and/or Component:
Heat exchanger components
Heat exchanger tubes
Isolation condenser components
Motor cooler
Non-regenerative heat exchanger components
PWR heat exchanger components
Regenerative heat exchanger components
The materials for the pertinent items in GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the
materials in this tool. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel and cast iron are listed as steel in the pertinent
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items. Gray cast iron is listed in the pertinent GALL Chapter
V, VII, and VIII items with respect to its susceptibility to selective leaching, but is otherwise
considered as steel. The pertinent GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items also list
stainless steel, alone or in combination with steel or with steel with stainless steel cladding. The
pertinent GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII items refer to copper and copper alloys as copper alloy
or copper alloy >15% Zn. There are no GALL items for aluminum or for titanium heat exchanger
components. With the exception of titanium, which is addressed in Section 5, the materials
addressed in this appendix are identified in Section 3.
The following GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII environments are bounded by the environments
addressed in this tool, which are described in Section 3 and addressed separately in Tables 6-2
through 6-7 respectively:
Table 7-1 GALL Environments and Tool Environments
GALL Environment(s) Appendix G Environment
Reactor coolant
Treated borated water >60C (>140F)
Treated water >60C (>140F)
Treated water
Primary Water (see also treated
water)
Treated water
Treated water >60C (>140F)
Treated borated water >60C (>140F)
Treated Water
Closed cycle cooling water
Closed cycle cooling water >60C (>140F)
Closed Cooling Water
Raw water Raw Water
Lubricating oil Lube Oil
Air
The following aging effects are cited in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII for the various heat
exchanger components, with the mechanism or groupings of mechanisms, depending on material
susceptibility and/or environment:
Cracking/ cyclic loading
Cracking/ stress corrosion cracking
Cracking/ stress corrosion cracking, cyclic loading
Cracking/ stress corrosion cracking, intergranular stress corrosion cracking
Loss of material/ general, pitting and crevice corrosion
Loss of material/ general, pitting, crevice, and galvanic corrosion
Loss of material/ general, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion
Loss of material/ general, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and
fouling
Loss of material/ general, pitting, crevice, galvanic, and microbiologically influenced corrosion,
and fouling
Loss of material/ microbiologically influenced corrosion
Loss of material/ pitting and crevice corrosion
Loss of material/ pitting, crevice, and galvanic corrosion
Loss of material/ pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion
Loss of material/ pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and fouling
Loss of material/ pitting, crevice, galvanic, and microbiologically influenced corrosion, and
fouling
Loss of material/ selective leaching
Reduction of heat transfer/ fouling
The GALL is consistent with the conclusions of the AMG and this tool, in that there are no items
that indicate thermal embrittlement or creep require management for heat exchanger components.
GALL Chapter VII includes an item addressing fatigue of heat exchanger components (VII.E1-4)
that is not related to steam generators. The AMG lists mechanical fatigue as an applicable aging
mechanism for heat exchanger materials in all environments. Fatigue, including fatigue of heat
exchangers, is evaluated separately in Appendix H of these Mechanical Tools.
The GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items addressing crevice corrosion are not
consistent with the AMG, and therefore are not consistent with this appendix, in that the AMG does
not address crevice corrosion as an applicable mechanism for heat exchangers. Also, the AMG
identifies pitting corrosion as an applicable mechanism for heat exchanger materials, other than
titanium, only when exposed to raw water. This is not consistent with the pertinent GALL Chapter
V, VII, and VIII items, which list pitting and crevice corrosion as aging mechanisms requiring
management for heat exchanger components, or with item 10 of Section 5 of this Appendix.

Table 7-2 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Primary Water Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Fouling V.D2-13
VII.E3-6
No Sections: Table 3-1, Table 6-2
Specified items cite reduction of heat transfer due to fouling of stainless steel heat
exchanger tubes in the BWR emergency core cooling system (e.g., RHR) and reactor
water cleanup system, respectively, that are exposed to treated water.
GALL items for BWR isolation condenser components (IV.C1-4, IV. C1-5 and IV.
C1-6) exposed to reactor coolant do not cite reduction of heat transfer as an aging effect
requiring management, but the corresponding GALL recommendations for aging
management include eddy-current testing of tubes.
Letdown Hx, Seal Return Cooler, and RHR Hx (PWR) are not easily differentiated
from other heat exchangers in the GALL Chapter V and VII heat exchanger items. See
Table 6-3 below.
Titanium (and its alloys) is not a material for GALL heat exchanger items.
Stainless
Steel and
Carbon
Steel and
Titanium
Wear None No
Sections: Table 3-1, Table 6-2
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list loss of material
due to wear as an aging effect requiring management in any environment, except for
PWR steam generator components that are not addressed in this tool.
Titanium (and its alloys) is not a material for GALL heat exchanger items.

Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Erosion/FAC None No
Sections: Table 3-1, 5 (Item 14), Table 6-2
due to erosion or FAC as an aging effect requiring management in any treated or closed
cycle cooling water or reactor coolant environment.
Carbon
Steel
General, Pitting
and Crevice
Corrosion
IV.C1-6 No
Sections: Table 3-1, 5 (Items 9, 10, and 12), Table 6-2
Specified GALL item cites loss of material due to general (steel only), pitting, and
crevice corrosion for isolation condenser (BWR) components exposed to reactor
coolant. AMG does not identify any aging mechanisms for loss of material, other than
erosion/FAC addressed above, as significant in primary water environments.
See also Table 6-3 below, for steel heat exchanger components exposed to treated
water.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
SCC IV.C1-4,
IV.C1-5
VII.E1-5,
VII.E1-9,
VII.E3-3,
VII.E3-19
Yes Section(s): Table 3-1, 5 (Items 6 and 11), Table 6-2
Specified GALL items cite cracking due to SCC and IGSCC for stainless steel (and
steel) isolation condenser components of a BWR exposed to reactor coolant and
stainless steel (or stainless steel clad) heat exchanger components in the RWCU or
CVCS systems exposed to treated water > 60C (140F). AMG does not identify any
aging mechanisms for loss of material, other than erosion/FAC addressed above, as
significant in primary water environments.
Additionally, items VII.E1-5 and VII.E1-9 cite cracking due to cyclic loading, along
with SCC, for stainless steel heat exchanger components of the PWR Chemical and
Volume Control Systems (CVCS), which are used during normal plant operations.
GALL Item IV.C1-5 cites cracking due only to cyclic loading of BWR isolation
condenser components. This appendix, and the AMG, are considered to include
cycling loading with the mechanical fatigue mechanism, which requires plant-specific
evaluation (Item 6 of Section 5).
See also Table 6-3 below, for stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to
treated water.
Stainless
Steel
Pitting, Crevice
Corrosion
IV.C1-6 No
Sections: Table 3-1, 5 (Items 9, 10, and 12), Table 6-2
Specified GALL item cites loss of material due to pitting and crevice corrosion for
isolation condenser (BWR) components exposed to reactor coolant. AMG does not
identify any aging mechanisms for loss of material, other than erosion/FAC addressed
above, as significant in primary water environments. See also Table 6-3 below, for
stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to treated water.

Table 7-3 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Treated Water Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801 (GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Fouling V.A-6,
V.D2-13
VII.A4-4,
VII.E3-6
VIII.E-10,
VIII.E-13,
VIII.E-7,
VIII.F-10,
VIII.G-10
Yes Sections: Table 6-3
Specified GALL items list reduction of heat transfer due to fouling as an aging effect
requiring management for stainless steel and copper alloy (VIII.E-10, VIII.F-7, and
VIII.G-10) heat exchanger tubes. Per Table 6-3, note 8, accumulation of particulates in
the bottom of a tank or reservoir can cause fouling of heat exchanger tubes exposed to
treated water if the water supply originates from the bottom; otherwise particulates in
treated water are considered to be too low to cause fouling.
While the GALL items address only stainless steel and copper alloy, consistent with the
AMG, other materials are susceptible to fouling, if the above conditions are met in a
treated water environment.
Titanium (or its alloys) is not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Wear None No Sections: Table 6-3
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not cite loss of material
due to wear as an aging effect requiring management in any environment, except for
PWR steam generator components that are not addressed in this appendix. Titanium
(or its alloys) is not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
All
Materials
MIC None No
Sections: 5 (Item 2), Table 6-3
due to MIC as an aging effect requiring management in treated water environments,
only in closed cooling water, lubricating oil, or raw water environments. Titanium (or
its alloys) is not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801 (GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Per item 2 of Section 5 of this appendix and Appendix A, Treated Water, MIC is only a
concern in treated water if plant-specific operating experience shows recurring or
unabated contamination from an open and/or natural source.
General,
Galvanic,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion
VIII.E-7,
VIII.E-37,
VIII.F-28
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 9, 10, and 12), Table 6-3
Specified GALL item cites loss of material due to general, pitting, and crevice
corrosion in treated water for heat exchanger components, whereas the other Tools
(e.g., Appendix A) and Section 5 clarifications indicate all of the specified aging
mechanisms are applicable in treated water. Item VIII.E-7 also cites galvanic corrosion
of steel heat exchanger components of the Condensate system.
AMG lists only general and galvanic corrosion as significant mechanisms for carbon
and low-alloy steel in a treated water environment.
Carbon
Steel
Erosion/FAC None No
due to erosion or FAC as an aging effect requiring management in any treated or closed
cycle cooling water or reactor coolant environment.

Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801 (GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
SCC None No
Sections: 5 (Items 6 and 15), Table 6-3
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list cracking due to
SCC of copper alloys (regardless of Zn content) as an aging effect requiring
management in treated, closed cycle cooling, or raw water environments.
As per Appendix A, Treated Water, of these Mechanical Tools, ammonium or
ammonium salts are necessary for SCC of copper alloys with >15% Zn.
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal,
Inhibited
Adm. Brass
Galvanic,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion
None No Sections: 5 (Items 9, 10 and 12), Table 6-3
due to pitting (or crevice) or galvanic corrosion of copper alloys as an aging effect
requiring management in treated water environments, but only in closed cycle cooling
water or raw water environments, as described in Table 6-4 and Table 6-5, respectively.
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal
(Cast Iron)
Selective
Leaching
VII.E1-3,
VII.F1-9,
VII.F3-9
(V.A-18,
V.D1-13)
Yes Sections: Table 6-3
Specified GALL Chapter VII items cite loss of material due to selective leaching as an
aging effect requiring management for copper alloys with >15% Zn that are exposed to
treated water. As per Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools and Note 2 of Table 6-3,
copper alloys that are inhibited, by the addition of small amounts of arsenic, tin, etc.,
are resistant to dezincification (selective leaching).
Specified GALL Chapter V items list loss of material due to selective leaching as an
aging effect requiring management for gray cast iron motor cooler components exposed
to treated water. Otherwise, cast iron is included with steel in the GALL items for
treated water. AMG does not specifically address cast iron, nor does it exclude its
inclusion with carbon and low-alloy steel, and only addresses selective leaching of
copper alloys, as described above. However, cast iron heat exchanger components
would also be susceptible to selective leaching.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801 (GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
SCC VIII.F-3 Yes
Specified GALL item cites cracking due to SCC as an aging effect requiring
management for stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to treated water >
60C (>140F) in a PWR steam generator blowdown system. See also Table 6-3 for
cracking of stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to primary water, as
described in Table 3-1.
Stainless
Steel
Pitting,
Crevice
Corrosion
VII. A4-2
VIII.E-4,
VIII.E-36,
VIII.F-27
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 9 and 10), Table 6-3
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to pitting and crevice corrosion as aging
effects requiring management for stainless steel or stainless steel cladding exposed to
treated water.


Table 7-4 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Closed Cooling Water Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
MIC VII.E3-1,
VII.E4-1
No Sections: 5 (Item 2), Table 6-4
Specified GALL items list loss of material due to MIC for stainless steel and stainless
steel clad heat exchanger components in BWR Reactor Water Cleanup and Shutdown
Cooling systems only that are exposed to closed cycle cooling water. The other
GALL items for closed cycle cooling water do not list MIC as a mechanism for loss
of material, for any material. Titanium (or its alloys) is not included in the GALL
heat exchanger items.
Per item 2 of Section 5 of this appendix and Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools,
MIC is only a concern in treated water (including closed cooling water) if plant-
specific operating experience shows recurring or unabated contamination from an
open and/or natural source.
All
Materials
GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list loss of material due
to wear as an aging effect requiring management in any environment. Titanium (or
its alloys) is not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
General,
Galvanic,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion
V.A-9,
V.D1-6,
V.D2-7
VII.A3-3,
VII.A4-3,
VII.C2-1,
VII.E1-6,
VII.E3-4,
VII.E4-2,
VII.F1-11,
VII.F2-9,
VII.F3-11,
VII.F4-8
VIII.A-1,
VIII.E-6,
VIII.F-5,
VIII.G-5
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 3, 9, 10, and 12), Table 6-4
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to general, pitting, crevice, and
galvanic corrosion in closed cycle cooling water for heat exchanger components,
whereas the other Tools (e.g., Appendix A) and section 5 clarifications indicate all of
the specified aging mechanisms are applicable in treated (closed cooling) water.
Carbon
and Low-
Alloy Steel
Erosion/FAC None N/A Sections: 5 (Items 3 and 14), Table 6-4
due to erosion or FAC as an aging effect requiring management in any treated or
closed cycle cooling water or reactor coolant environment.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Carbon
and Low-
Alloy Steel
(Contd)
Fouling VII.F1-13,
VII.F2-11,
VII.F3-13,
VII.F4-9
VIII.A-2,
VIII.E-14,
VIII.F-11,
VIII.G-14
No Section(s): Table 6-4
Specified GALL items cite reduction of heat transfer due to fouling as an aging effect
requiring management for steel heat exchanger components exposed to closed
cooling water. AMG, and Table 6-4, do not list fouling as a significant mechanism in
a closed cooling water environment.
However, note 8 of Table 6-3, Treated Water, may also be applicable to closed
cooling water if the water supply originates at the bottom of a tank or reservoir.
Galvanic,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion
V.A-5,
V.D1-2,
V.D2-3
VII.E1-2,
VII.F1-8,
VII.F3-4
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 3, 9, 10 and 12), Table 6-4
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to pitting, crevice, and galvanic
corrosion of copper alloy heat exchanger components exposed to closed cycle
cooling water. The same effects, though not identified in the AMG, are applicable to
copper alloy components in a treated (closed cooling) water environment, per the
specified items of Section 5 and Appendix A, Treated Water, of these Mechanical
Tools.
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal,
Inhibited
Adm. Brass
SCC None No Sections: 5 (Items 3, 6 and 15), Table 6-4
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list cracking due to
SCC of copper alloys (regardless of Zn content) as an aging effect requiring
management in treated, closed cycle cooling, or raw water environments.
As per Appendix A, Treated Water, of these Mechanical Tools, ammonium or
ammonium salts are necessary for SCC of copper alloys with >15% Zn.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal,
Inhibited
Adm. Brass
(Contd)
Fouling V.A-11
VII.C2-2,
VII.F1-12,
VII.F2-10,
VII.F3-12
VIII.E-8
No
Section(s): Table 6-4
requiring management for copper alloy heat exchanger components exposed to
closed cooling water. AMG, and Table 6-4, do not list fouling as a significant
mechanism in a closed cooling water environment.
cooling water, if the water supply originates at the bottom of a tank or reservoir.
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal
Selective
Leaching
V.A-6,
V.B-5,
V.D1-3,
V.D2-4
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 3, 6, and 15), Table 6-4
Specified GALL Chapter V items cite loss of material due to selective leaching as an
aging effect requiring management for copper alloys with >15% Zn that are exposed
to closed cycle cooling water. As per Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools and
Note 2 of Table 6-4, copper alloys that are inhibited, by the addition of small
amounts of arsenic, tin, etc., are resistant to dezincification (selective leaching).
Stainless
Steel
Pitting,
Crevice
Corrosion
V.A-7,
V.D1-4,
V.D2-5
VIII.E-2,
VIII.F-1,
VIII.G-2
Yes
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to pitting and crevice corrosion as an
aging effect requiring management for stainless steel exposed to treated water.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
SCC VII.E3-2 Yes Sections: 5 (Items 6 and 11), Table 6-4
Specified GALL item cites cracking due to SCC as an aging effect requiring
management for stainless steel or stainless steel clad heat exchanger components
exposed to closed cycle cooling water >60C (>140F) in a BWR RWCU system
(e.g., cooling water outlet of the non-regenerative heat exchanger).
Stainless
Steel
(Contd)
Fouling V.A-13,
V.D1-9,
V.D2-10
VII.C2-3,
VII.E3-5,
VII.E4-3
VIII.E-11,
VIII.F-8,
VIII.G-11
No Section(s): Table 6-4
requiring management for stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to
closed cooling water. AMG, and Table 6-4, do not list fouling as a significant
mechanism in a closed cooling water environment.
cooling water if the water supply originates at the bottom of a tank or reservoir.

Table 7-5 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Raw Water Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Fouling V.A-15,
V.D1-11,
V.D2-12,
V.D2-15
VII.C1-6
VII.C1-7,
VII.C3-1,
VII.G-7,
VII.H2-6
VIII.G-16
VIII.E-9,
VIII.E-12,
VIII.F-6,
VIII.F-7,
VIII.G-9,
VIII.G-13
Yes
Specified GALL items list reduction of heat transfer due to fouling as an aging effect
requiring management for steel, stainless steel, and copper alloy heat exchanger tubes
exposed to raw water. Titanium (or its alloys) is not included in the GALL heat exchanger
items.
As described below, certain GALL items also identify fouling as a mechanism for loss of
material in raw water environments.
All
Materials
Wear None No
GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list loss of material due to wear
as an aging effect requiring management in any environment. Titanium (or its alloys) is not
included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel
Crevice,
Galvanic,
General,
Pitting
Corrosion or
MIC or
Erosion
V.A-10,
V.D1-7,
V.D2-8
VII.C1-5
VIII.E-6,
VIII.F-5,
VIII.G-7
Yes
Sections: 5 (Items 8, 9, 10, 12 and 14), Table 6-5
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to general, pitting, crevice, galvanic, and
microbiologically influenced corrosion and fouling of steel heat exchanger components
exposed to raw water. GALL items for heat exchangers, and other raw water/metal items,
do not list erosion as an aging mechanism for loss of material.
Crevice,
Pitting,
Galvanic
Corrosion or
MIC or
Erosion
VII.C1-3 Yes
Sections: 5 (Items 8, 9, 10, 12, and 14), Table 6-5
Specified GALL item cites loss of material due to pitting, crevice, galvanic, and
microbiologically influenced corrosion and fouling of copper alloy heat exchanger
components exposed to raw water. GALL items for heat exchangers, and other raw
water/metal items, do not list erosion as an aging mechanism for loss of material.
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal and
Inhibited
Adm. Brass
SCC None No
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list any copper alloys as
being susceptible to cracking. Furthermore, Appendix B of these Mechanical Tools
indicates that ammonia or ammonium salts are necessary for SCC of copper alloys with >
15% Zn or >8% Al.


Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Cu, Cu-
Alloys,
Muntz
Metal
Selective
Leaching
VII.C1-4
Yes
Specified GALL Chapter VII item cites loss of material due to selective leaching as an aging
effect requiring management for copper alloys with >15% Zn that are exposed to raw water.
As per Appendix A of these Mechanical Tools and Note 2 of Table 6-5, copper alloys that
are inhibited, by the addition of small amounts of arsenic, tin, etc., are resistant to
dezincification (selective leaching).
Pitting
Corrosion,
Crevice
Corrosion,
MIC
V.A-6,
V.D1-5,
V.D2-6
VIII.E-3,
VIII.F-2,
VIII.G-4
Yes
Sections: 5 (Items 8, 9, and 10), Table 6-5
Specified GALL items cite loss of material due to pitting, crevice, and microbiologically
influenced corrosion, and fouling for stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to
raw water.
Stainless
Steel
SCC None Yes
Section(s): 5 (Items 6, 8, and 11), Table 6-5
GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list cracking due to SCC of
stainless steel or stainless steel cladding exposed to raw water. Per Note 11 of Section 5 of
this appendix and Appendix B, Raw Water, of these Mechanical Tools, SCC of stainless
steel is considered plausible only if temperatures are >140F, which is not typical of raw
water systems.


Table 7-6 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Lubricating Oil Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Fouling V.A-12,
V.A-14,
V.A-17,
V.D1-8,
V.D1-10,
V.D1-12,
V.D2-9,
V.D2-11,
V.D2-14
VIII.G-8
VIII.G-12
VIII.G-15
No
Sections: Table 6-6
requiring management for copper alloy, steel, and stainless steel heat exchanger tubes
exposed to a lubricating oil environment. Titanium (or its alloys) is not included in the
GALL heat exchanger items.
AMG does not address fouling as a mechanism for loss of material, per se, but with respect
to an accumulation of particulates, if the source of the oil is the bottom of a tank or
reservoir that results in carryover of particulate matter.
All
Materials
Wear None No Sections: 5 (Item 13), Table 6-6
GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list loss of material due to
wear as an aging effect requiring management in any environment. Titanium (or its alloys)
is not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel
General,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion and
MIC
VII.H2-5
VIII.G-6
No
Specified GALL items cite general, pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced
corrosion of steel heat exchanger components exposed to lubricating oil. The GALL items
include no indication of whether the lubricating oil contains water.
AMG and Table 6-6 do not list general, crevice, pitting, or microbiologically influenced
corrosion as significant aging mechanisms in a lube oil environment. Per Item 13 of
Section 5 of this appendix and Appendix C, Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil, of these
Table 7-6 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Lubricating Oil Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Mechanical Tools, there are no aging effects in lubricating oil environments, unless the oil
is contaminated by the intrusion of water.
Also, GALL item VII.H2-5 also cites fouling as a mechanism for loss of material of steel
heat exchanger components, Emergency Diesel Generator System, whereas item VIII.G-6,
Auxiliary Feedwater System, does not. The GALL includes no basis/justification for
inclusion of a mechanism for one systems components but not anothers, when the
environment and material are the same or similar.
Stainless
Steel
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion and
MIC
VIII.G-3 No Sections: 5 (Item 13), Table 6-6
Specified GALL item cites pitting, crevice, and microbiologically influenced corrosion of
stainless steel heat exchanger components exposed to lubricating oil. The GALL item
includes no indication of whether the lubricating oil contains water.
AMG and Table 6-6 do not list general, crevice, pitting, or microbiologically influenced
corrosion as significant aging mechanisms in a lube oil environment. Per Item 13 of
Section 5 of this appendix and Appendix C, Lubricating Oil and Fuel Oil, of these
Mechanical Tools, there are no aging effects in lubricating oil environments, unless the oil
is contaminated by the intrusion of water.


Table 7-7 GALL Comparison for Heat Exchangers / Air Environment
Material
Aging
Mechanism
NUREG-1801
(GALL) Item
No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Fouling None No Sections: Table 6-7
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items do not list fouling in an air environment,
either as a mechanism for loss of material or for reduction of heat transfer. Titanium
and aluminum (or their alloys) are not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
All
Materials
GALL Chapter V, VII, and VIII heat exchanger items do not list loss of material due
to wear as an aging effect requiring management in any environment. Titanium and
aluminum (or their alloys) are not included in the GALL heat exchanger items.
Carbon and
Low-Alloy
Steel
General,
Crevice,
Pitting
Corrosion
VII.F1-10,
VII.F2-8,
VII.F3-10,
VII.F4-7,
VII.G-5,
VII.G-6,
VII.H2-3,
VII.H2-4
Yes Sections: 5 (Items 9, 10 and 12), Table 6-7
Specified GALL items cite general, crevice and pitting corrosion of steel heat
exchanger components exposed to uncontrolled air, either indoor (external) or
outdoor (external). For the purposes of this tool the external surface is considered to
be the outer surface of heat exchanger tubes. The AMG does not list general or
pitting corrosion as significant mechanisms in an air environment, and does not
address crevice corrosion.
However, consistent with Appendix E, External Surfaces, the Mechanical Tools
indicate that general corrosion is an applicable mechanism for steel in moist air
environments and that pitting corrosion (as well as crevice corrosion) is an applicable
mechanism if a surface is frequently or continually wetted, such as the outer surface
of a tube filled with raw or chilled water could be expected to be.

EPRI Licensed Material

8. REFERENCES
Plants-Heat Exchangers, Contractor Report No. SAND93-7070, J une 1994.
2. M. G. Fontana, Corrosion Engineering, Third Edition, Copyright 1986, McGraw Hill.
Appendix H
Non-Class 1 Fatigue Screening Criteria

This non-Class 1 fatigue screening document provides a methodology for identifying components
that may be susceptible to cracking due to fatigue. Cracking due to other aging mechanisms may be
assessed using the material- and environment-based tools presented in Appendices A through E.
Fatigue of bolting materials is not addressed in this tool but is treated separately in the Bolted
Closure Tool in Appendix F. This document may be applied when evaluating susceptibility to
fatigue cracking of the following components: pipe, tubing, fittings, tanks, vessels, heat exchangers,
valve bodies and bonnets, pump casings, bellows, and miscellaneous process components.

CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 1-1
2. SCOPE, MATERIALS, AND ENVIRONMENTS....................... 2-1
2.1 Scope ................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Materials............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.3 Environments ..................................................................................................... 2-1
3. CRACKING DUE TO FATIGUE.................................................. 3-1
3.1 Compliance to Design Requirements ............................................................... 3-1
3.1.1 Piping and In-Line Components.......................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Storage Tanks, and Pumps......................... 3-3
3.2 Unanticipated Thermal Fatigue ....................................................................... 3-3
4. FLOW CHART DEVELOPMENT............................................... 4-1
4.1 Screening Criteria for Piping and In-Line Components................................ 4-1
4.1.1 System Level........................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1.2 Component Level................................................................................................. 4-1
4.2 Screening Criteria for Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Storage
Tanks, and Pumps ............................................................................................. 4-1
4.2.1 ASME Section VIII ............................................................................................. 4-2
4.2.2 ASME Section III ................................................................................................ 4-2
4.2.3 Other Codes and Standards.................................................................................. 4-2
4.2.4 Screening Criteria................................................................................................ 4-3
5. COMPARISON TO GALL FATIGUE ITEMS............................ 5-1
6. REFERENCES................................................................................ 6-1

Fatigue-Appendix H i
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 4-1 ANSI B31.1 and ASME III Non-RCPB Piping, Expansion Bellows,
In Line Components, and CLB Requirements......................................................... 4-4
Figure 4-2 ASME III and ASME VIII Non-RCPB Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers,
Storage Tanks, and Pumps....................................................................................... 4-5
Fatigue-Appendix H ii
LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 3-1 Stress Range Reduction Factors (f)............................................................................ 3-2
Table 5-1 GALL Environments for Fatigue Items..................................................................... 5-2
Table 5-2 GALL Comparison Non-Class 1 Fatigue Items...................................................... 5-3

Fatigue-Appendix H iii
1. INTRODUCTION
The non-Class 1 fatigue screening document (hereafter referred to as the Fatigue Tool) provides a
logic and methodology by which systems within the scope of license renewal may be evaluated to
determine locations susceptible to fatigue cracking. Cracking due to other aging mechanisms may
be assessed using the material- and environment-based tools presented in Appendices A through E.
Fatigue of bolting materials is not addressed in this tool but is treated separately in the Bolted
Closure Tool in Appendix F. The Fatigue Tool may be applied when evaluating susceptibility to
fatigue cracking of the following components: pipe, tubing, fittings, tanks, vessels, heat exchangers,
valve bodies and bonnets, pump casings, and miscellaneous process components.
Fatigue failures in mechanical piping and components are sometimes categorized as either low cycle
(typically less than 10,000 cycles) or high cycle (typically millions of cycles). Low cycle fatigue
failure might occur after fewer than 10,000 cycles but only if strains exceed the yield strain. High
cycle fatigue failure might occur at strains below the yield strain but only after many cycles. High
cycle fatigue concerns are generally associated with high speed rotating or reciprocating equipment,
vibration, or local thermal cycling due to hot and cold fluid mixingi.e., thermal striping. Most
nuclear power plant design fatigue applications reside within the low cycle regime.
A review of operating plant performance history [Volume 2 of Reference 1] reveals three general
classifications of fatigue issues that have been observed in operating plants: vibrational fatigue
failures, thermal fatigue failures, and plant license/design basis concerns. Vibrational fatigue is not
considered in the Fatigue Tool since failures due to vibration are typically detected early in
component service life [1] and actions are taken to prevent recurrence. Cracking due to vibrational
fatigue is not an applicable aging effect for the period of extended operation. For standby systems
subject to periodic testing, such as HPCI, failure caused by high cycle fatigue may be a longer term
issue. Evaluation of high cycle fatigue for infrequently used systems is not addressed in this
appendix and should be considered on a case-by-case basis by the user of this document.
Cracking due to thermal fatigue is considered in the Fatigue Tool. Thermal fatigue is attributed to
thermal stresses that occur whenever expansion or contraction that result from heating or cooling of
a body is prevented; the constraints that prevent expansion or contraction can be either externally
imposed or self-imposed due to the configuration of the body and the temperature distribution.
Locations that are susceptible to aging (including cracking due to thermal fatigue) must be identified
in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 54.21 (a)(3) for components within the scope of
license renewal.
Plant license/design basis fatigue concerns address the design requirements associated with the
components in question. For example, ANSI B31.1, ANSI B31.7, and ASME Section III include
design requirements to prevent fatigue failures of piping and components. Specific editions of these
Codes are part of the current licensing basis (CLB) for each nuclear plant. For license renewal, it is
necessary to demonstrate that the piping and components comply with the fatigue requirements of
these codes considering the stress cycles through the period of extended operation in accordance
with 10 CFR 54.21 (c).
Fatigue-Appendix H 1-1
The non-Class 1 scope is large and the majority of the scope is not subject to significant cyclic
thermal loading. The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines (screening criteria) for
reviewing the non-Class 1 scope to identify the small subset which should be evaluated in more
detail. Piping and components in this subset will either be shown acceptable by analysis, will be
included in an augmented inspection program, or will be repaired or replaced. The scope of
components covered by the Fatigue Tool, including materials and environments, is discussed in
Section 2.0. The susceptibility of various components to thermal fatigue is discussed in Section 3.0.
The development of the screening criteria to be applied to the components within the scope of
license renewal is presented in Section 4.0. A comparison of the fatigue screening to fatigue related
items in NUREG-1801, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (the GALL report) is presented in
Section 5.0.

2. SCOPE, MATERIALS, AND ENVIRONMENTS
The scope of components covered in the Fatigue Tool is discussed in Section 2.1. Materials of
construction and operating environments that apply to the components within this scope are
summarized in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, respectively.
2.1 Scope
Class 1 components are exposed to conditions that exceed the screening thresholds established in
this appendix and are also subject to additional considerations, as outlined in the resolution of
Generic Safety Issue GSI-190. As such, this appendix is not applicable to Class 1 components.
This document is intended for application to the following non-Class 1 components: pipe, tubing,
fittings, tanks, vessels (except containment vessels), heat exchangers, valve bodies and bonnets,
pump casings, bellows type expansion joints, miscellaneous process components, and other
components that received fatigue evaluations in accordance with NRC requirements (e.g., BWR
torus attached piping). The component evaluation boundary is consistent with the evaluation
boundaries for the following design codes: ASME III (NC and ND), B 31.7 Class II and III, ASME
VIII (Division 1 and 2), and B31.1. Tanks and vessels designed in accordance with TEMA and API
are not within the scope of this appendix.
2.2 Materials
The materials that may be evaluated with the Fatigue Tool include carbon, low-alloy, and high
tensile steels, austenitic steels, nickel-chromium-iron alloy, nickel-iron-chromium alloy, and nickel-
copper alloy steels. These materials should be evaluated for metal temperatures as designated by the
Code of Record in the current licensing basis or the original design.
The subsequent sections of the Fatigue Tool specifically address carbon steel and stainless steel. As
in Appendices A through E, the discussions and logic for carbon steel are considered to be
applicable to low-alloy steel. Likewise, the discussions and logic for stainless steels are considered
to be applicable to nickel-base alloys.
Due to the varying microstructures, textures, and surface treatments for the various aluminum and
titanium alloys, which are the main variables for the fatigue life of those materials, plant-specific
evaluation is recommended. Refer to the pertinent articles contained in Volume 19 of the ASM
Handbook, Fatigue and Fracture, Copyright 1996 by the American Society of Metals (ASM)
International for additional information.
2.3 Environments
The environments for the piping and components that may be evaluated with the Fatigue Tool are
those defined in Appendices A through E. However, this tool addresses the thermal stresses to
which piping and components may be subjected during normal operation without consideration of
the impact of any loss of material during the period of extended operation resulting from the
presence of corrosives in these environments.
If loss of material occurs in the environments covered by this tool, then further case-by-case
evaluation is required to assess the impact of the loss of wall thickness caused by aging mechanisms
during the license renewal period. For example, the use of this tool is non-conservative when
assessing fatigue damage if the component being evaluated is in a configuration subject to high
stress intensification factors or subjected to thermal cycles and is also susceptible to general
corrosion or pitting corrosion.

3. CRACKING DUE TO FATIGUE
Non-Class 1 piping and components that require further evaluation of thermal fatigue to demonstrate
suitability for license renewal will be identified through reviews for the following:
a) Compliance to Design Requirements
Non-Class 1 piping and components will be reviewed to determine if thermal fatigue design
requirements in ANSI B31.1, ASME III, and ASME VIII are met considering additional
thermal cycles due to extended operation. Thermal expansion stress (S
e
) is included in this
evaluation because the value of S
e
must not exceed the alternating stress (S
a
) which is a
function of the stress range reduction factor. Local strain is considered in the calculation of
S
e
and is not a function of time.
b) Unanticipated Thermal Fatigue
NRC bulletins and information notices were reviewed to identify non-Class 1 piping and
components which may have experienced unanticipated thermal fatigue.
3.1 Compliance to Design Requirements
As discussed in Section 1.0, compliance to code design requirements for the period of extended
operation must be demonstrated in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21 (c). A review of design codes
typically applicable to the non-Class 1 license renewal scope was performed. The results of the
review were used to prepare the criteria discussed in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2.
3.1.1 Piping and In-Line Components
Most non-Class 1 piping and in-line components (i.e., fittings and valves) are designed in
accordance with ANSI B31.1 or ASME III Subsections NC and ND. Under these Codes, secondary
stresses (i.e., stress due to thermal expansion and anchor movements) are evaluated for fatigue using
Stress Intensification Factors (SIFs) and stress range allowables. The early SIFs and allowables are
based for the most part on the Mark l fatigue tests. Later SIFs are based on experimental and
analytical studies and the relationship between the SIF and the ASME III Class 1 stress indices for
moment loading (C2 and K2). The allowable secondary stress range is 1.0 S
A
for 7000 cycles or
less and is reduced in steps to 0.5 S
A
for greater than 100,000 cycles. No increase is allowed for
less than 7000 cycles. Typical stress range reduction factors are shown in Table 3-1.
Evaluation of localized peak stresses due to thermal transients is not required by ANSI B31.1 or
ASME III NC/ND. The basis for not requiring evaluation of peak stresses is that adequate
protection against fatigue is provided by the rules existing in the Code for design conditions. Also,
thermal transients are generally less severe for non-Class 1 piping.


Table 3-1 Stress Range Reduction Factors (f)
Number of Equivalent Full Temperature Cycles
N f
7,000 and less 1.0
7,000 to 14,000 0.9
14,000 to 22,000 0.8
22,000 to 45,000 0.7
45,000 to 100,000 0.6
100,000 and over 0.5

Primary stresses in non-Class 1 piping due to earthquake, fluid transients, and other cyclic primary
loads are evaluated against conservative stress limits designed to prevent ductile failure but are not
specifically evaluated as a contributor to fatigue. Again, this is due to conservatism in the Code for
design conditions, and also due to the very small number of stress cycles postulated for earthquakes
and fluid transients.
High cycle fatigue is not a concern for license renewal since it would be discovered during the
current license period in most cases where systems are frequently operated, as is supported by the
following discussion of NRC information notice 2002-026. For standby systems subject to periodic
testing, such as HPCI, failure caused by high cycle fatigue may be a longer term issue. Evaluation
of high cycle fatigue for infrequently used systems is not addressed further in the Fatigue Tool and
should be considered on a case-by-case basis by the user of this document.
IN 02-026: Failure of Steam Dryer Cover Plate After a Recent Power Uprate
This information notice alerted licensees of failure of a steam dryer cover plate during operation
following a power uprate at a boiling water reactor (BWR). In March 2002, a BWR completed a
refueling outage which included a modification to add baffle plates to the steam dryer to reduce the
excessive moisture carryover expected as a result of an extended power uprate. In J une 2002, the
unit began experiencing fluctuations in steam flow, reactor pressure and level, and moisture
carryover in the main steam lines. The licensee discovered that a dryer cover plate on the outside of
the steam dryer had broken loose. Preliminary results of scale model testing indicated that the
failure of the plate was due to high cycle fatigue driven by flow-induced vibration. This fatigue was
attributed to excessive vibration caused by the synchronization of the cover plate resonance
frequency, the nozzle chamber standing acoustic wave frequency, and the vortex shedding
frequency. The licensee concluded that the three frequencies synchronized in a very narrow band of
steam flow at or near the steam flow required to reach full power under the power uprate. This
experience supports high cycle fatigue being a design issue and not a license renewal concern.
3.1.2 Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Storage Tanks, and Pumps
Most non-Class 1 pressure vessels, heat exchangers, storage tanks, and pumps are designed in
accordance with ASME VIII or ASME III Subsection NC or ND (i.e., Class 2 or 3)
1
. Some tanks
and pumps are designed to other industry Codes and standards such as American Water Works
Association (AWWA) standards and Manufacturers Standardization Society (MSS) standards.
Only ASME Section VIII Division 2 and ASME Section III Subsection NC-3200 include fatigue
design requirements. Conservatism in ASME Section VIII Division 1 and ASME Section III NC-
3100/ND-3000 compensates for excluding requirements for detailed fatigue analysis. Also, it is
expected that the component designer would have specified ASME Section VIII Division 2 or NC-
3200 if cyclic loading and fatigue usage could be significant.
Both ASME Section VIII Division 2 and ASME Section III NC-3200 include provisions for
exemption from fatigue, which is actually a simplified fatigue evaluation based on materials,
configuration, temperature, and cycles.
Fatigue analysis is not required for ASME Section VIII Division 1, Section III NC-3100 or ND
vessels. It is also not required for NC/ND pumps and storage tanks (<15 psig). The applicable
design Code for each component is noted in the component Code Data Report, Design Specification,
and Stress Report. It is also noted on the nameplate attached to each component.
3.2 Unanticipated Thermal Fatigue
Actual fatigue failures encountered in piping and components have arisen not because of
inadequacies in design methodology, but because unanticipated thermal fatigue loads were present
that were not accounted for in the original design. In particular, thermal stratification, cycling, and
striping in feedwater piping have resulted in numerous instances of pipe cracking due to fatigue. A
search of NRC bulletins and notices to find issues related to thermal stratification in the
feedwater/auxiliary feedwater piping and piping connected to the RCS has been performed. The
results of this search are summarized below.
IE Bulletins
BL 79-13 (Revisions 0, 1, 2): Cracking in Feedwater System Piping
Cracking in feedwater system piping was addressed under IE Bulletin 79-13. Licensees with CE
and Westinghouse steam generators reported crack indications in 16" feedwater elbows adjacent to
steam generator nozzle elbow welds. No indications of cracking were found in B&W units. The
NRC requested all PWR facilities to conduct examinations during the first refueling outage. Of the
54 PWRs facilities that were required to respond, cracks were found and corrected at 18 of them. It
was recommended that licensees continue to perform inspections to detect possible future
degradation in feedwater piping.

1
ASME III Subsection NC applies to Class 2 piping and components. Class 2 was designated Class B in early Codes.
ASME Subsection ND applies to Class 3 piping and components. Class 3 was designated Class C in early Codes.
BL 88-08: Thermal Stresses in Piping Connected to Reactor Coolant Systems
Thermal stresses in piping connected to reactor coolant systems were addressed under IE Bulletin
88-08. Leaks due to cracked welds in unisolable sections of piping connected to the RCS primary
piping occurred at Farley 2, Tihange 1 (Belgium), and Genkai (J apan). As a result, the NRC
requested licensees to review systems connected to the RCS and provide assurance that unisolable
sections of piping will not be subjected to combined cyclic and static thermal and other stresses that
could cause fatigue failure during the life of the plant. This is a TLAA issue for Class 1 components
and will be addressed on a plant-specific basis.
Information Notices
IN 84-87: Piping Thermal Deflection Induced by Stratified Flow
Information Notice 84-87 notified power reactor facilities of damage to a feedwater system due to
piping thermal deflection from stratified flow. At WNP (now Columbia Generating Station)
feedwater pipe hangers and snubbers were damaged and a flange loosened, allowing a small leak.
This event was attributed to thermal stratification during unit startup. The NRC requested licensees
to consider actions to avoid similar problems.
IN 88-01: Safety Injection Pipe Failure
Information Notice 88-01 alerts addressees to a potentially generic problem concerning the
reliability of piping in safety-related systems because of valve leakage that resulted in thermal
cycling of the piping. On December 9, 1987, while restarting Farley Unit 2 after a refueling outage,
the licensee noted increased moisture and radioactivity within containment. The unidentified leak
rate for the RCS was determined to be 0.7 gpm. By ultrasonic testing, the licensee found an
indication of a crack on the interior surface of the 6-inch ECCS piping connected to the cold leg of
RCS Loop B. The indication was located at a weld connecting an elbow and a horizontal spool.
Further, the indication was on the underside of the pipe and extended circumferentially 60 degrees in
both directions from the bottom of the pipe. The crack extended through the wall for approximately
1 inch at the center of the indication. Visual and metallographic examinations showed that the weld
had failed as a result of fatigue after roughly one million stress cycles. The stress loads were
thermal, and the problem was corrected by directing the valve leakage away from the ECCS
manifold.
IN 89-80: Potential for Water Hammer, Thermal Stratification, and Steam Binding in High-Pressure
Coolant Injection Piping
Information Notice 89-80 identifies the potential for water hammer, thermal stratification, and steam
binding in high pressure coolant injection piping resulting from failure of high-pressure coolant
injection (HPCI) valves in boiling water reactors (BWRs) during operation of the reactor at power.
On February 21, 1989, with Dresden Unit 2 operating at power, temperature was greater than normal
in the HPCI pump and turbine room. The abnormal heat load was caused by feedwater leaking
through uninsulated HPCI piping to the condensate storage tank. During power operation,
feedwater temperature is less than 350F, and feedwater pressure is approximately 1025 psi.
Normally, leakage to the condensate storage tank is prevented by the injection check valve, the
injection valve, or the discharge valve on the auxiliary cooling water pump. On October 23, 1989,
with the reactor at power, leakage had increased sufficiently to raise the temperature between the
injection valve and the HPCI pump discharge valve to 275F and at the discharge of the HPCI pump
to 246F. Pressure in the HPCI piping was 47 psia. On the basis of the temperature gradient and the
pressure in the piping, the licensee concluded that feedwater leaking through the injection valve was
flashing and displacing some of the water in the piping with steam. The event at Dresden is
significant because the potential existed for water hammer or thermal stratification to cause failure
of the HPCI piping and for steam binding to cause failure of the HPCI pump.
IN 91-19: Steam Generator Feedwater Distribution Piping Damage
Information Notice 91-19 was prepared to alert plants to the degradation that was possible in the
feedwater system piping due to thermal stress, cracking, erosion, and corrosion.
IN 91-28: Cracking in Feedwater System Piping
Information Notice 91-28 notified addressees of the issuance of NUREG/CR-5285 that documented
the close-out of the Bulletin 79-13 responses for the 54 PWRs that were required to respond. The
report recommended that licensees continue to perform inspections to detect possible degradation in
feedwater piping.
IN 91-38: Thermal Stratification in Feedwater System Piping
Information Notice 91-38 identified concerns with thermal stratification in feedwater system piping
and the resulting unacceptable pipe movement. At Beaver Valley 1 global stratification occurred
over a long stretch of horizontal feedwater piping inside the containment. Instrumentation detected
top to bottom temperature differentials as much as 200
o
F. The horizontal section is preceded by a
20 vertical section that did not provide adequate mixing to prevent stratification. It was concluded
that the vertical sections offer little (if any) protection from stratification. The NRC requested
licensees to consider actions to avoid similar problems.
Summary
It is concluded that unanticipated thermal fatigue is managed by plant-specific actions resulting from IE
Bulletins 79-13 and 88-08, and the heightened awareness to this issue due to the aforementioned
Information Notices.

4. FLOW CHART DEVELOPMENT
Screening criteria for addressing non-Class 1 components may be addressed within the following
two component groups: (1) piping and in-line components, and (2) pressure vessels, heat
exchangers, storage tanks, and pumps.
4.1 Screening Criteria for Piping and In-Line Components
Screening criteria for piping and in-line components are depicted in Figure 4-1. Screening consists
of system and component level reviews.
4.1.1 System Level
The first step in system level screening is to identify piping which may have Normal/Upset
Condition operating temperature in excess of 220F for carbon steel or 270F for austenitic stainless
steel. These values are based on recommendations in the EPRI Fatigue Management Handbook,
Volume 2, Section 4.2 (Reference 1), which indicate that systems or portions of systems with
operating temperatures below these thresholds may generally be excluded from fatigue concerns
since the fluid temperature would not be expected to vary more than 150F for carbon steel or 200F
for stainless steel. However, any local component residual stress and/or geometry specific stress
intensification factors can result in lower temperature thresholds, and, therefore, must be evaluated
on a plant-specific case-by-case basis.
The second system level step is to determine if the equivalent full temperature cycles
1
considering
the period of extended operation are below the limit used for original design (usually 7000 cycles).
Separate evaluation of individual pipe stress calculations is required if the cycle limit is exceeded
during extended life.
4.1.2 Component Level
If the equivalent full temperature cycles
1
considering extended operation exceed the limit used for
original design (usually 7000 cycles), evaluation of individual pipe stress calculations are required
to confirm qualification. The stress range reduction factor, f, should be applied to reduce the
allowable stress. If calculated stress levels are below the reduced allowable, suitability for extended
operation is demonstrated. If not, further evaluation is required.
4.2 Screening Criteria for Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Storage Tanks, and Pumps
Screening criteria for pressure vessels, heat exchangers, storage tanks, and pumps are depicted in
Figure 4-2. The first step is to identify components which may have Normal/Upset Condition
operating temperature in excess of 220F for carbon steel or 270F for austenitic stainless steel.
This prescreening will generally eliminate components from further fatigue review based on a

1
Equivalent full temperature cycles are generally much less than total cycles considering small temperature changes.
Equivalent full temperature cycles may be computed in accordance with ANSI B31.1, section 102.3.2 or ASME III NC
3611.2.
temperature criteria (since the fluid temperature will not vary more than 150F for carbon steel or
200F for stainless steel), unless there are any local component residual stress and/or geometry
specific stress intensification factors which can result in lower temperature thresholds and, therefore,
must be evaluated on a plant-specific case-by-case basis.
In the second step, the screening criteria are dependent upon the applicable design requirements.
Code Data Reports, Design Specification, Stress Reports, component nameplates, or contract files
will indicate whether the pressure vessel, storage tank, or pump is designed and fabricated in
accordance with ASME VIII Division 1 or Division 2, ASME III NC or ND (i.e., Class 2 or 3), or
other Codes/Standards requirements.
4.2.1 ASME Section VIII
Under ASME Section VIII, only Division 2 vessels require evaluation for thermal fatigue (i.e.,
design requirementssee Section 3.1). Most non-Class 1 Pressure Vessels are designed and
fabricated according to ASME VIII Division 1 requirements and are suitable for the period of
extended operation without further evaluation.
If Section VIII Division 2 vessels were specified, the Design Specification and/or Stress Report
should be reviewed to determine the number of stress cycles assumed for design. If the number of
stress cycles considering the period of extended operation is below the number used for design, the
component is suitable for the period of extended operation without further evaluation. If
exemption from fatigue criteria were used, the basis for the exemption (i.e., number of cycles)
should be reviewed to confirm that the exemption remains valid for the period of extended
operation.
4.2.2 ASME Section III
Under ASME Section III, only Class 2 Pressure Vessels and Heat Exchangers designed in
accordance with NC-3200 require evaluation for thermal fatigue (see Section 3.1). Fatigue
evaluation is not required for ASME III Class 2 and 3 Pumps, Class 2 and 3 Storage Tanks (<15
psig), or Class 3 Pressure Vessels.
If Class 2 Pressure Vessels and Heat Exchangers are specified, the Design Specification should be
reviewed to determine if evaluation for fatigue was required (i.e., if NC-3200 design requirements
were specified). If so, the Design Specification and/or Stress Report should be reviewed to
determine the number of stress cycles assumed for design. If the number of stress cycles
considering extended life is below the number used for design, the component is suitable for life
extension without further evaluation. If exemption from fatigue criteria were used, the basis for
the exemption (i.e., number of cycles) should be reviewed to confirm that the exemption remains
valid for extended life.
4.2.3 Other Codes and Standards
Under AWWA and MSS standards, fatigue evaluation is not required for pumps and storage tanks.
4.2.4 Screening Criteria
Design Codes for the following components do not require evaluation for fatigue. These
components are acceptable for operation in the extended period associated with license renewal
without further evaluation.
ASME Section VIII Division 1 Components
ASME Section III Class 2 and 3 (or Class B and C) Pumps
ASME Section III Class 2 and 3 (or Class B and C) Storage Tanks (pressure <15 psig)
ASME Section III Class 3 (or Class C) Pressure Vessels
AWWA or MSS Pumps and Storage Tanks
The following components may require evaluation for fatigue. See Figure 4-2 for additional details.
ASME Section VIII Division 2 Components
ASME Section III Class 2 Pressure Vessels and Heat Exchangers and Expansion Bellows

Figure 4-1 ANSI B31.1 and ASME III Non-RCPB Piping, Expansion Bellows, In Line Components, and CLB Requirements
N
N
Non-RCPB piping,
expansion bellows, in-
line components, and
CLB requirements?
Carbon
Steel?
Stainless
Steel?
Y
Y
Maximum fluid
temperature >220F?
Y
Maximum fluid
temperature >270F?
Are the number of
equivalent cycles
projected to exceed
7000 for extended life?
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
N
Y
Y
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
Y
Y
After application of stress
range reduction factor f
(based on equivalent full
temperature cycles
projected for extended
life), do calculated stress
levels exceed
allowables?
N
N
Note 5
Note 6
Note 3
Note 1
N
Document evaluations
acceptable for period
of extended operation
Further evaluation is
required.
Y
Notes:
1. If the range of temperature change varies, equivalent full temperature cycles may be computed in accordance
with ANSI B31.1, section 102.3.2 or ASME III NC 3611.2.
2. Individual pipe stress calculations may be reviewed to determine if >7000 cycles was assumed for the 40 year
design basis calculations. If so, substitute that value in the cycle comparison.
3. Temperature limits from EPRI TR-104534, Vol. 2, Section 4.2.
4. Configurations subject to high stress intensification factors and/or geometry/component specific residual
stresses may require further evaluation.
5. Considered to also apply to low-alloy steel.
6. Considered to also apply to nickel-base alloys.
Note 2
Note 4
Note 4

4-5

N
N
Y Y
N
Non-RCPB pressure vessels
(including heat exchangers),
storage tanks, and pumps
Carbon Steel?
Stainless Steel?
Y
Note 4
Y
Maximum fluid
temperature >220F?
Y
Maximum fluid
temperature >270F?
Is the pressure vessel,
storage tank, or pump
designed and fabricated
to ASME VIII Division 1,
AWWA, or MSS
requirements?
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
N
Y
Y
Acceptable for
period of extended
operation
Y
N
Y
N
N
Is the pressure vessel, storage
tank, or pump designed and
fabricated to ASME VIII
Division 2 requirements?
Is the pressure vessel, tank,
or pump designed and
fabricated to ASME VIII
Division 2 requirements?
Are the number of stress cycles
projected for the extended life
above the number used for
design (Note 7)?
Further evaluation is required.

Acceptable for period
Class 2 pressure
vessel?
Was a fatigue
evaluation required
(Note 7)?
For Class 2 or 3
storage tanks or pumps
and Class 3 pressure
vessels, component is
acceptable for period of
extended operation

Note 5
Note 6
Notes 1, 3
Note 1
Note 2 Note 3
Y Y
N
N
N
Notes:
1. Code Data Reports, component nameplates, Design Specifications, Stress Reports, and contract
files will indicate whether the Pressure Vessel (including heat exchangers), Storage Tank, or Pump is
designed and fabricated according to ASME VIII Division 1 or Division 2, ASME III Class 2 or 3,
AWWA, or MSS requirements.
2. Under ASME III rules, only Class 2 Pressure Vessels (including heat exchangers) designed
according to subsection NC-3200 require evaluation for fatigue.
3. Fatigue evaluation is not required for ASME VIII Division 1 components, ASME Class 2 and 3
Pumps, Class 2 and 3 Storage Tanks (pressure <15 psig), Class 3 Pressure Vessels, and AWWA
or MSS tanks or pumps.
4. Configurations subject to high stress intensification factors and/or high residual stresses that are
geometry/component specific may require further evaluation.
5. Also considered to apply to low-alloy steel.
6. Also considered to apply to nickel-base alloys.
7. Review Design Specification and/or Design Report to determine the number of stress cycles
assumed or whether a fatigue evaluation was required.
Note 4
Figure 4-2 ASME III and ASME VIII Non-RCPB Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Storage Tanks, and Pumps
Fatigue-Appendix H
5. COMPARISON TO GALL FATIGUE ITEMS
mechanical components. GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII tables all include items for fatigue
addressed by this tool. The identification and evaluation of aging management programs (AMPs) is
outside the scope of this tool and should be addressed on a plant-specific basis, as described in
Section 4.0 of the main document. Pertinent GALL items are addressed in Table 5-2, with the
following component, material, environment, and aging effect/mechanism considerations.
As described in Section 4.1 and Section 4.2 respectively, this fatigue tool includes screening criteria
for the evaluation of cracking due to fatigue for piping and piping components (e.g., pumps), and for
heat exchangers, pressure vessels, storage tanks, and pumps designed to ASME Section VIII or
Section III requirements. The components addressed by this fatigue tool, therefore, include the
components listed for fatigue items in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII, with certain
clarifications:
This tool does not distinguish between external and internal surfaces, as do the GALL items
(as described in the environment discussions below).
Fatigue cracking of closure bolting is evaluated in Appendix F.
GALL Chapter IV (Reactor Coolant) fatigue items are primarily for Class 1 components and
considered for this tool if the component could also include non-Class 1 components (e.g.,
steam generator components, pressurizer relief tank, and reactor vessel internals components,
such as steam dryers).
Certain GALL Chapter IV and VII fatigue items (IV.A1-7, IV.A2-20, and VII.B-2) are for
structural components, such as support skirts and crane girders.
The materials for the pertinent items in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII are consistent with the
materials in this tool. Carbon steel, low-alloy steel, and cast iron are listed as steel in the pertinent
GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items. The pertinent GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII
fatigue items also list stainless steel, alone or in combination with steel, steel with stainless steel
cladding, or nickel-base alloy. There are no GALL items for fatigue of aluminum (or aluminum
alloys) or for titanium (or titanium alloys). The materials addressed in this appendix are identified
in Section 2.2.
As described in Section 2.3, this tool evaluates thermal stresses on components without regard to the
environments to which they are exposed. As such, the following GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and
VIII environments are bounded by this tool:

Table 5-1 GALL Environments for Fatigue Items
Air indoor uncontrolled
Reactor coolant and secondary feedwater/steam
Secondary feedwater / steam
Steam or treated water
Treated borated water
Treated Water

All of the items addressing fatigue in GALL Chapters IV, V, VII, and VIII cite cumulative fatigue
damage/fatigue as the aging effect requiring management. Certain other items cite cracking due to
cyclic loading, mechanical loading, and/or thermal loading, in conjunction with stress corrosion
cracking. However, loading-related degradation is dependent on the design, installation, and
operation of a component, and so requires plant-specific evaluation, and is not addressed in this tool.
Also, the pertinent GALL Chapter IV, V, VII, and VIII items do not in all cases include temperature
thresholds during normal plant operations. However, some of the GALL environments listed above
are above the thresholds in all cases, such as secondary feedwater/steam, steam, system temperature
up to 288C (550F), and system temperature up to 340C (644F), whereas the others may or may
not be above the thresholds, depending on the system.

Table 5-2 GALL Comparison Non-Class 1 Fatigue Items
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Relevant Discussion
Carbon
Steel
Cracking /
Fatigue
IV.C1-11,
IV.C2-10,
IV.C2-23,
IV.D1-11,
IV.D2-10

V.D2-32

VII.E1-18,
VII.E3-17

VIII.B1-10,
VIII.B2-5,
VIII.D1-7,
VIII.D2-6,
VIII.G-37
Yes Figures 4-1 and 4-2 of this tool include decision points for temperature thresholds >
220F for carbon steel (also applies to low-alloy steel). The specified GALL items do
not identify temperature thresholds for applicability; however, as clarified below the
items are for internal or external environments of systems that would exceed the
threshold and require further evaluation.
Items IV.C1-11 and IV.C2-10 cite cumulative fatigue damage due to fatigue for
steel (and stainless steel) reactor coolant system piping and components due to
system temperatures above 550F and 644F, respectively.
The other specified GALL Chapter IV items are for fatigue of secondary side steam
generator or pressurizer relief tank components.
Item V.D2-32 cites fatigue of steel BWR emergency core cooling system piping and
components, which only see temperatures above 220F during testing or emergency
operation (# cycles to be determined or code fatigue requirements determined).
Specified GALL Chapter VII items cite fatigue of steel PWR Chemical and Volume
Control, BWR Reactor Water Cleanup, and BWR Shutdown Cooling piping and
components, a portion of which experience temperatures above 220F (# cycles to
be determined or code fatigue requirements determined).
Specified GALL Chapter VIII items are for fatigue of steel Main Steam piping and
components exposed to steam or treated water and Feedwater piping and
components exposed to treated water.
Also, GALL item VIII.G-37 lists fatigue of PWR auxiliary feedwater piping and
components, portions of which may or may not experience temperatures above 220F,
depending on the systems design for a given plant.

Table 5-2 GALL Comparison Non-Class 1 Fatigue Items
Material
Aging Effect /
Mechanism
NUREG-
1801
(GALL)
Item No.
Tool vs
GALL
Match
Relevant Discussion
Stainless
Steel
Cracking /
Fatigue
IV.B1-14,
IV.B2-31,
IV.B3-24,
IV.B4-37,
IV.B4-38,
IV.C2-10,
IV.C2-11,
IV.C2-23

V.D1-27,
V.D2-32

VII.E1-4,
VII.E1-16,
VII.E3-14,
VII.E3-17,
VII.E4-13
270F for stainless steel (also applies to cast austenitic stainless steel). The specified
GALL items do not identify temperature thresholds or otherwise clarify applicability.
However, as clarified below the items are for internal or external environments of
systems that would exceed the threshold and require further evaluation.
The specified GALL Chapter IV items are for fatigue of vessel internals, some of
which are non-Class 1 (e.g., BWR steam dryer), external surfaces of PWR reactor
coolant system piping and components, and the cladding of a PWR pressurizer relief
tank (# cycles to be determined or code fatigue requirements determined).
Specified GALL Chapter V items list fatigue of stainless steel BWR and PWR
emergency core cooling system piping and components, which only experience
temperatures above 270F during testing or emergency operation (# cycles to be
determined or code fatigue requirements determined).
Specified GALL Chapter VII items list fatigue of stainless steel PWR Chemical and
Volume Control System piping and components and heat exchanger shell side
components, and BWR Reactor Water Cleanup System piping and components, a
portion of which experience temperatures above 270F (# cycles to be determined or
code fatigue requirements determined).
Nickel-
Base Alloy
Cracking /
Fatigue
IV.B1-14,
IV.B2-31,
IV.B3-24,
IV.B4-37,
IV.B4-38,
IV.D1-21,
IV.D2-15
270F for stainless steel (also applied herein to nickel-base alloys). The specified
GALL items do not identify temperature thresholds or otherwise clarify applicability.
However, as clarified below the items are for internal or external environments of
systems that would exceed the threshold and require further evaluation.
The specified GALL Chapter IV items list fatigue of vessel internals, some of which
are non-Class 1 (e.g., BWR steam dryer), and steam generator components that
include nickel alloys (cycles to be determined or code fatigue requirements
determined).

6. REFERENCES
1. EPRI Fatigue Management Handbook, TR-104534-V1, -V2, and -V3, Research Project 3321-
01, December 1994.

2006 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved.
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of
the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America
Program:
Nuclear Power
1010639
Export Control Restrictions
Access to and use of EPRI Intellectual Property is granted with
the specific understanding and requirement that responsibility
for ensuring full compliance with all applicable U.S. and
foreign export laws and regulations is being undertaken by
you and your company. This includes an obligation to ensure
that any individual receiving access hereunder who is not a
U.S. citizen or permanent U.S. resident is permitted access
under applicable U.S. and foreign export laws and
regulations. In the event you are uncertain whether you or
your company may lawfully obtain access to this EPRI
Intellectual Property, you acknowledge that it is your
obligation to consult with your companys legal counsel to
determine whether this access is lawful. Although EPRI may
make available on a case-by-case basis an informal
assessment of the applicable U.S. export classification for
specific EPRI Intellectual Property, you and your company
acknowledge that this assessment is solely for informational
purposes and not for reliance purposes. You and your
company acknowledge that it is still the obligation of you and
your company to make your own assessment of the applicable
U.S. export classification and ensure compliance accordingly.
You and your company understand and acknowledge your
obligations to make a prompt report to EPRI and the
appropriate authorities regarding any access to or use of EPRI
Intellectual Property hereunder that may be in violation of
applicable U.S. or foreign export laws or regulations.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), with major locations in
Palo Alto, California, and Charlotte, North Carolina, was established
in 1973 as an independent, nonprofit center for public interest
energy and environmental research. EPRI brings together members,
participants, the Institutes scientists and engineers, and other leading
experts to work collaboratively on solutions to the challenges of electric
power. These solutions span nearly every area of electricity generation,
delivery, and use, including health, safety, and environment. EPRIs
members represent over 90% of the electricity generated in the
United States. International participation represents nearly 15% of
EPRIs total research, development, and demonstration program.
Together...Shaping the Future of Electricity
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE
3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1395 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA
800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

000000000001010639

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

000000000001010639

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Technical Report

Anda mungkin juga menyukai