ML19320A642

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Addl Info Re Corrective Actions for Steam Generator Chemistry & Corrosion,Per NRC 800408 Request
ML19320A642
Person / Time
Site: North Anna Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 06/30/1980
From: Sylvia B
VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To: Clark R, Harold Denton
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
352, NUDOCS 8007020456
Download: ML19320A642 (19)
v • d • e


Text

_ . , _ .

s

' 71 %

i TOS DrutT;T cmr. a P00.1 QUAUTY PAGES VIRGINIA ELucTurc Axn l'owna CoxeAs1 - {

Rrcuxoxo.VzmorwrA const June 30, 1980 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Serial No. 352 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation N0/DWL/WAT:ms AlfN: Mr. Robert A. Clark, Chief Docket No. 50-338 Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 License No. NPF-4 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Mr. Denton:

NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 _

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING STEAM GENERATOR CHEMISTRY AND CORROSION Attached you will find additional information regarding the corrective actions which were implemented as a result of the observed North Anna Unit No. I steam generator support plate corrosion. This information is provided in response to your letter dated April 8, 1980.

Very truly yours,

.0

,u B. R. Sylvia Manager - Nuclear Operations and Mainten'nce Attachment ec: Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement - Region II i

8007020 g 6

m 4 ,;

Attachment REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION-REGARDING

. STEAM GENERATOR CHEMISTRY AND CORROSION

. NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 NRC REQUEST-

. 1. The results of the' flushing program to reduce the sulfate contaminates, in :particular, data .on hideout return after 50% load reduction and prior to returning to full power.

RESPONSE __

To date,- steam generator blowdown samples have been obtained at low power

(*27%); zero power following a unit trip; during a power ramp and also at stable low power operation ($30%). A comprehensive chemical return study was set up . for- the next scheduled shutdown (the last week in May). This study was . agreed upon between VEPC0 and Westinghouse. The recommended procedure was:

-A. Reduce blowdown to approximately 10 gpm/SG and establish equilibrium chemistry conditions.

B. Sample steam generators during power reduction. Blowdown samples b are to be collected at intervals corresponding to each 20% reduction in power level.

C. Hold unit at 20 - 30% reactor power for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. Sample steam generator blowdown every 4 - .6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and analyze samples for boric acid concentration and selected hideout' species.

D. . If boric acid concentration is around 1.0 ppm and decay curve for cation . conductivity is asymptotic and <2 pmhos/cm, proceed to hot shutdown. If cation conductivity is >2 pmhos/cm, use maximum' blow-down . flowrate to bring the steam generator bulk water chemistry within the normal range. When proper chemistry conditions have been established, proceed to hot shutdown.

However, the unit tripped at 2240 hours0.0259 days <br />0.622 hours <br />0.0037 weeks <br />8.5232e-4 months <br /> on May 22, 1980 and the unit proceeded : to cold shutdown. Steam generator samples were taken and

- are .in the process of being analyzed. Preliminary data on a sample -

.taken at 0900 hours0.0104 days <br />0.25 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.4245e-4 months <br /> on May 23 are shown in Table 1.1.

)

_.L' , m

TABLE 1.1 SAMPLE TAKEN AT 0900 HOURS ON MAY 23, 1980 FOLLOWING UNIT TRIP Steam Generator A B C pH 7.79 7.72 7.63 Conductivity pmhos/cm 5.80 5.80 5.58 Cation conductivity pmhos/cm 10.5 11.6 10.8 C1 ppm 0.38 0.35 0.36 Na ppm 0.66 0.70 0.66 SiO2ppm 0.95 0.89 0.95 02 ppb 0.0 0.0 0.0 NH ppm 0.16 0.16 0.20 3

NH 2 4 ppm <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 Blowdown gpm 20 20 20 A

Power % 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table 1.1 indicates that hideout return is occurring. The cation conductivity cannot be accounted for by the anions analyzed for. As in previous samples, it is expected that sulfate will be present and contri-bute towards the unaccounted for cation conductivity. Other samples are in the process of being analyzed. The data available to date would indi-cate that material is still returning.

NRC REQUEST

2. The effects of boric acid treatment on the non-stainless steel ferrous components in the feedwater train of the secondary system.

RESPONSE

In order to identify the potential corrosiveness of the feedwater to non-stainless ferrous materials at North Anna Unit No. 1, calculations have been carried out to determine the pH of solutions containing typical boric acid and ammonia concentrations experienced at North Anna Unit No.

1 ~ and at . temperatures consistent with the feedwater train. Table 2.1 l shows the temperature profile of the feedwater train.

L t

i 2

'n A TAoLE 2.1 NORTH A!!NA UNIT NO. 1 FEEDWATER TRAIN TEMPERATURES Location Temperature *F Condensate 100

  1. 6 heater 110 (inlet) 176 (outlet)
  1. 5 heater 176 (inlet) 228 (outlet)
  1. 4 heater 228 (inlet) 284 (outlet)
  1. 3 heater 284 (inlet) 315 (outlet)
  1. 2 heater 315 (inlet) 386 (outlet)
  1. 1 Heater 389 (inlet) 437 (outlet)

{ Boric acid concentrations in the feedwater are expected to range from 0.5 to 1.0 ppm B (for a steam generator bulk concentration of 5 - 10 ppm B).

The calculations cover 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 ppm B. Ammonia concentrations at North Anna Unit No. I normally have been 0.1 and 0.2 ppm, with occasional excursions to 0.4 ppm. Separate Tables 2.2 through 2.6 are provided for 0.1, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3 and 0.4 ppm NII3 '

Correlations of equilibrium ionization data at saturation pressure and zero ionic strength were used in these calculations. Corrections for the effect of ionic strength are negligible at the concentrations of boric acid and ammonia considered. Similarly, corrections for the differences between feedwater pressures and saturation pressures are also negligible.

The ionization data employed were those of Sweeton, Mesmer and Baes for water (1), Hitch and Mesmer for ammonia (2), and Mesmer, Baes and Sweeton for boric acid (3). All borate ion species indicated by reference 3 were included in the calculations.

Figure 2.1 shows the typical effect of boric acid on alkalinity at feed-train temperatures in North Anna Unit No. 1, for 0.25 ppm NH with and without 1.0 ppm B. 3 The pH depression effect of boric acid is significant only in the No. 6 heater (110 - 176 F). This is the lowest temperature heater. The solutions are still above neutral, therefo re , significant corrosion due to the presence of boric acid is not expected. At the higher temperatures the boric acid depression is negligible, the added ammonia being the chemically dominate species, thereby ' providing the desired alkalinity.

3

s i.

References

1.  :

F.- H. - Sweeton,. R. E. tiesmer and C. F. Baes, Jr. , J. Solution Chemistry, 3, page 191,_1974.

2. B .- Hitch and 'R. E. tiesmer, J. Solution Chemistry, 5_, page 667, 1976.
3. R.~ . E. tiesmer, .C. F. Baes, Jr. , and F. H. Sweeton, Proceedings from the 32nd International ~ Water Conference, Pittsburgh, PA page 55, 1971.

s 4

) m 9M f-

.o FIGURE 2.1 TYPICAL EFFECT OF BORIC ACID ON ALKALIN ~TY '

  • AT.FEEDTRAIM TEM?ERATURES IN NORTH ANNA I '

2.0- .

'E t y 0.25 ppm NH3 Alone 3,g_

E

.P 2

. E- 2--G %

a  %

$  ? [4 \

s 1.0-y 0.25 ppm NH 3 -

--- with boric acid i et 1.0 ppm B M

,I 9

0. 5 -

\ A CO.i0 #4 Htr. #2 Htr. #1 Htr.

  1. 6 Htr. #5 Htr. > N l< 4 I f< >i< >l< >!<#3 Htr.f<

t I i O i t 250 300 350 400 440 70 100 150 200 - .

Temperaturc(*F) 5

TABLE 2.2 pH OF AfD10NIA' BORIC ' ACID MIXTURES FOR .1 PPM NH '

3 PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) .

0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0' 8.66 8.41 8.24 8.12.

8.02 7.95 100.0 8.27 8.12 8.01. 7.92 7.84 7.78 110.0 8.12 8.00 7.90 7.83 7.7o 7.70 176.0 7.28 7.25 7.22 7.20 7.18 7.15 228.0 6.78 6.77 6.76 6.75 6.74 6.74 284.0 6.38 6.37 6.37 6 37 6.36 6.36 315.0 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.19 6.19 6.19 386.0 5.91 5.90 5.90 5.90 5.90 5.90 389.0 5.90 5.90 5."3 5.89 5.89 5.89 437.0 5.77 5.77 5.77 5.77 5.77 5.77 x1 pH pH(NEUT) 0F AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .1 PPM NH 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 1.66 1.41 1.25 1.13 1.03 .95 100.0 1.47 1.32 1.21 1.12 1.04 .98 110.0 1.39 1.28 1.18 1.10 1.04 .98 176.0 .97 .94 .92 .89 .87 .85 228.0 .72 .71 .70 .69 .68 .67 284.0 .51 .50 .50 .50 .49 .49 315.0 .41 .41 .41 .41 .40 .40

-386.0 .25 .25 .25 .24 .24 .24 389.0 .24 .24 .z? .24 .24 .24 437.'0 .16- .16 .16 .16 .16 .16 6

E.

  1. p

. . =-

TABLE 2.3

~

pil 0F AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .2 PPM NIi 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F)~

0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 8.90 8.69 8.53 8.41 8.32 8.24 100.0 -8.51 8.38 8.28' 8.19 8.12 8.06 110.0 8.36 8.25 8.17 8.09 8.03 7.98 176.0 7.51 7.48 7.46 7.44 7.42 7.40 228.0 7.00 6.99 6.98 6.98 6.97 6.96

~ 284.0 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.56 6.56 6.56 315.0 6.38' 6.38 6.38 6.37 6.37 6.37 386.0 6.04 6.04~ 6.04 6.04 6.04 6.04 389.0 6.03 6.03 6.03 (.03 6.03 6.03 437.0 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.87 5.87 5.87 t--

pH-pH(NEUT) 0F AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .2 PPri NH 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 1.90 1.69 1.54 1.42 1.32 1.25 100.0 1.71 1.58 1.48 1.39 1.32 1.26 110.0 1.63 1.53 1.44 1.37 1.31 1.26 176.0 1.20 1.18 1.16 1.13 1.11 1.09 228.0 .94 .93 .92 .91 .90 .90 284.0 .70 .70 .70 .69 .69 .69 315.0 .59 .59 .59 .59 .58 .58 386.0 .38 .38 .38 .38 .38 .38 389.0 .38 .37 .37 .37 .37 .37 437.0 .27 .27 .26 .26 .26 .26 7

o ,.

F-

~ TABI.E 2.4 -

pH OF AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .25-PPM NH 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 8.97 8.77- 3.62 8.51 8.42 8.34 100.0 8.58 8.46 8.36 8.28 8.21- 8.15 110.0 8.43 8.33 8.25 8.18 8.12 8.06 176.0 7.58 7.56 7.53 7.51 7.49 7.47 228.0 7.07 7.06 7.05 7.05 7.04 7.03 284.0 6.64 6.63 6.63 6.63- 6.62 6.62 315.0 6.44 6.44 6.44 6.43 6.43 6.43 386.0 6.09 6.09 6.09 6.09 6.09 6.09 389.0 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.07 6.07 6.07 437.0 .5.92 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91

..g-o

_pH pH(NEUT) 0F AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .25 PPM NII 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG.-F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00-77.0 1.98 1.78 -1.63 '1.51 1.42 1.34 100.0 1.78 1.66 1.56 1.48 1.41 1.35 110.0 1.71 1.61 1.53 1.46 1.39 1.34 176.0 1.28 1.25- 1.23 1.21 1.19 1.17 228.0 1.01 1.00 .99 .98 .97 .97 284.0 .77 .76 .76 .76 .75 .75 315.0 .65 .65 .65 .65 .64 .64 386.0 .43 .43 .43 .43 .43 .43

'389.0- .42 .42 .42 .42 .42 .42

_437.0 .31 .30 .30 .30 .30 .30 8

. . ~

TABLE 2.5 pH OF AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .3 PPM NH 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00

-77.0 .9.03 8.84 8.70 8.58 8.49 8.42 100.0 8.64 8.52 8.43 8.35 8.28 8.22 110.0 8.49 8.39 8.31 8.25 8.19 8.13 176.0 7.64 7.62 7.59 7.57 7.55 7.53 228.0 7.13 7.12 7.11 7.10 7.09 7.09 284.0' 6.69 6.69 6.68 6.68 6.68 6.67 315.0 6.49 6.49 6.49 6.48 6.48 6.48 386.0 6.13 6.13 6.13 6.13 6.13 6.13 389.0 6.12 6.12 6.12 6.12 6.11 6.11 437.0 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 L

pH pH(NEUT) 0F. AMMONIA, BORIt. ACID MIXTURES FOR .3 PPM NH 3

PPM B TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 . 4( .60 .80 1.00 77.0 2.03 .1.85 1.70 1.59 1.50 1.42 100.0 1.84 '1.72 1.63 1.55 1.48 1.42 110.0 1.77 1.67 1.59 1.52 1.46 1.41 176.0 1.33 1.31 1.29 1.27 1.25 1.23 228.0 1.06 -1.05 1.05 1.04 1.03 1.02 284.0 .82 .82 .81 .81 .81 .80 315.0 .70 .70 .70 .70 .69 .69 386.0 .47 .47 .47 .47 .47 .47 389.0. .46 .46' .46- .46 .46 .46 437.0- .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 .34 9

+ .

TABLE 2.6 pH OF AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .4 PPM NH 3

. PPM B TEMP.

-(DEG. F) 0.00 ..0 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 9.12 8.93 8.81 8.70 8.61 8.54 100.0 8.73 8.61 8.53 8.46 8.39 8.33

-110.0 8.58 8.49 8.41 8.35 8.29 8.24 176.0 7.73 7.70 7.68 7.66 7.64 7.63 228.0- 7.21 7.20 7.19 7.19 7.18 7.17 284.u~ 6.77 6.77 6.76 6.76 6.76 6.75 315.0 6.57- 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 386.0 6.20 6.20 6.19 6.19 6.19 6.19 389.0 6.18 6.18 6.18 6.18 6.18 6.18 437.0 6.01 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 a

pH pH(NEUT) 0F AMMONIA, BORIC ACID MIXTURES FOR .4 PPM NH 3

PPM B

. TEMP.

(DEG. F) 0.00 .20 .40 .60 .80 1.00 77.0 ' 2.12 - 1.95 1.82 1.71 1.62 1.54 i-

-100.0 1.93 1.82 1.73 1.66 1.59 1.53 110.0 1.86 1.77 1.69 1.63 ~1.57 1.52 176.0 1l.42 1.40 1.38 1.36 1.34 1.32 228.0 .1.15 1.14 1.13 1.12 1.11 1.11 284.0 .90 .90 .89 .89 .89 .8C l- 315.0 .78 .78 .77 .77 .77 .77 L 386.0 .54~ .54 : .54 .54 .53 .53 1 389.0 .53 .53 .53 .53 .53 .52 437.0 .40 .39 .39 .39 .39 .39 l'

b'~

10

, 4 -

NRC REQUEST-

3. Preliminary data on the effectiveness of the boric acid treatment to

-stop tube support plate corrosion; i.e., (a) results of the low power soak treatment, (b) boron analysis on condensate, feedwater, blowdown, main steam and heater drains, and (c) hydrogen, oxygen, ammonia, pH, and cation conductivity analysis.

dESPONSE The following is a summary of the low power (25 - 35%) soak with boric acid at North Anna Unit No. 1. The objective of the boric acid soak is to reduce the rate of denting by minimizing further corrosion of the carbon steel TSP tube hole. The steam generator boric acid conditioning commenced January 9, at 2400 hours0.0278 days <br />0.667 hours <br />0.00397 weeks <br />9.132e-4 months <br />, however, due to operational delays, the low power boric acid soak was not completed until January 27, at 2400 nours. In accordance with the subject boric acid conditioning procedure, a boron accountability program was also performed to determine secondary system boron demand. From the data collected (cee Figure 3.1 and 3.2 for graphical presentation of data), it appears that the steam generator boron demand was satisfied (according to the 90% accountability criteria) within the 96 hour0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> soak period. The cumulative (between January 9-27) boron accountability for the three steam generators was 91%.

3.1 Conditions and Sequence of Test The injection of boric acid into the steam generators (via the r- auxiliary feed system) was initiated January 9 at approximately 1500 h_ours . At this time, the unit was at 350 F. Later that day the temperature was reduced to approximately 200 F. This mode of opera-tion (fluctuation in system temperature) continued through January

15. On January 10, the boron concentration reached 45 5 ppm for each of the steam generators and remained at approximately that level for the duration of the soak.

On January 15, at approximately 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />, operations established feed from the hotwell to the steam generators. At about 1625 hours0.0188 days <br />0.451 hours <br />0.00269 weeks <br />6.183125e-4 months <br /> the unit reached hot standby conditions and remained in this mode until-January 19. 1980, at which time physics testing was performed (N3% RX Power). After returning to hot standby (s550 F) for a day, the unit was takan to power (a maximum of 27% Rx Power was obtained) to perform the turbine overspeed test which was completed on January 22.

The boric acid soak commenced on January 23 at 2400 hours0.0278 days <br />0.667 hours <br />0.00397 weeks <br />9.132e-4 months <br /> and was completed on January 27 at 2400 hours0.0278 days <br />0.667 hours <br />0.00397 weeks <br />9.132e-4 months <br />. The range of reactor power, during the 96 hour0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> soak, was between 27% and 35% as shown in Figure 3.2.

3.2 Results 3.2.1 Steady-state accountability tests were conducted on January 26 (between 0030-0745) and January 27 (between 1215-2030). The boron concentrations for these periods were:

11

o -

Janua 6 26 0030 46 43 39 ppm B

. 0745 .40 39 36 ppm B January 27 1215 53 52' 47 ppm B 2030 48 48 47 ppm B As per the recommended procedure, boron demand is satis-fied when:

[B] =x ' lith no blowdown

't = 90% i 5

[BJ t=o Where x is > 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> Calculations for January 26 and January 27 give ratios of 89 and 94% respectively, i.e. , the results indicate that boron demand was satisfied under steady-state conditions.

3.2.2 As of January 27, 245 kg of boron (1379 kg of boric acid) were added to the secondary system. 222 kg of boron were 4 accounted for based on the total mass leaving the steam generator plus the the steam generator bulk water inven-tory. Therefore, the accumulative hideout of boron in the North Anna Unit I steam generators is estimted at 23 kg or 9% of the total boron addition.

3.2.3 During transient power conditions, control chemistry para- f meters (specifically cation conductivity and chlorides) were not within the guidelines identified in the proce-dure. Therefore, action was taken to bring the unit down to hot standby conditions to remove impurities from the steam generator water. The unit remained at hot standby conditions for approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

The high cation conductivity was thought to be due to sul-fate (S0g) return -in the steam generators. The data in Tabel 3.1 reveal some . SO 4 return; however, the sulfate could not be analyzed on a daily basis due to laboratory linitations. The data also reveal that the chloride i species could not account for the total increase in cation conductivity. In some cases the cation conductivity can be accounted for by the measured chloride and sulfate.

In other cases the data indicate the presence of other anions. These were not identified and, therefore, a i complete assessment of the steam generator environment during the soak is not possible. '

12 )

I

A

-3.3 . Hydrogen Monitoring

- A- hydrogen monitoring program at North Anna Unit I has been underway

'since the boron soak. Figure 3.3 shows the average corrosion hydro-

., gen (g. moles /hr) for the tima period of _ March, 1980 - May, 1980.

the ' data indicates a stable corrosion hydrogen value of approximate-ly - 0.5 g. moles /hr. When - North Anna -Unit I starts up,-a further

' boric acid soak will be carried out at 50 ppm B to ascertain that

-the boron demand in . the steam generators has been satisfied. On line addition of 5 to 10 ppm B as boric acid is being maintained and hydrogen moniterir.g continued.

i i

'13

TABLE 3.1

-AVERAGE DAILY STEAM GENERATOR DATA STEAM GENERATOR A W' ANALYSES STEAM GENERATOR B .W ANALYSES STEAM GENERATOR C' W ANALYSES

~

CAT COND Cl** SO C1' ppm CAT COND Cl** SO C1 ppm CAT COND Cl** SO 4 4 4 Cl ppm:

.DATE pmhos/cm ppm ppm SO4 ppm pmhos/cm ppm ppm SO 4 ppm pmhos/cm ppm ppm Sog ppm 1/09/80 7.00* 0.08 6.58* 0.12 '16.00* 0.20 1/10/80 '5.02*. 0.09 3.54* 0.09 4.42* 0.10 1/11/80 2.99* 0.05 2.34* -<0.05 2.81* <0.05 1/12/80 3.00* 0.06 2.57* 0.06- 2.94* ~0.06 1/13/80 3.32* ~<0.05 2.90* ~<0.05 3.60* <0.05 1/14/80 3.99* 0.12 3.24* 0.07 2.75* 0.06 1/15/80: 3.86* 0.13 3.10* 0.09 3.34* 0.08 1/16/80 3.75* 0.06- 2.73* 0.06 3.10* 0.07 1/17/80 3.16 <0. 05 - 2.40* <0.05 3.13* 0.06 1/18/80 2.30* 70.05 1.95 70.05 2.06* 0.05

'1/19/80- 2.08* -0.05 1.77 -0.11 1.85 0.08 1/20/80 2.33*- <0.05 1.99 <0.05 2.2* <0.05 1/21/80. 1.85 70.0; 1.66 70.05 1.77 70.05 1/22/80 5.57* 70.05 0.1 5.73* 70.05 6.06* 70.05 0.19 1/23/80 '12.49* 0.10 0.06 10.75* 0.21 <0.5 0.05 10.72* 0.07 0.385 0.06 0.13 0.11 0.12 I/24/80 3.01* 0.12 10.5 <0.01 3.07* 0.11 $0.5 3.34* 0.10 10.5 0.04 1/25/80 2.13* <0.05 <0.01 2.18* <0.05 2.38* <0.05 0.09 1/26/80 2.11* <0.05 2.14* <0.05 2.15* <0.05 1/27/80 2.28* 70.05 <0.01 2.20* 70.05 2.31* 70.05 0.10 1/28/80 1.72- -

1.83 -

1.82 -

  • AVT Guideline upper. limit is-2.00 pahos/cm ,
    • Conc. of $.05 incl. as 0.05 in avg.

14 t

1

l

~

AU(} JO 4'4]JO[U;' JOJ aanOd E U 'j'()

ii.IIM l X U! j J Di'.'Jd ^ U 7,L d I '4 5 01 JQTjlf.J a!,0 Olli f1J n i 3 0 LIO L'l Uettil'l tlO')

.to!'.od >.3 zs - c Fa sal paadcaali0 autg.ini ao3 d:neu aanod

~

.tamodXU 7.Cs Gutacal solcEyd e

rr".

O Lf>

  • to N

O (L -

[*! === .

O J

t t*J j (17 -

CL .

C .

M to _

pf l E$

m 1

m.

T 6

-m M

h g.*"

~ -

_ - _ - 1 I

o o c. o a o o a o o o a O o a C3 ( ') O CJ O O I% LD LO. Al M (\1 &

y.g (g y si t ') L st e- Q

.t;o t1.paa i jo d 15

(;]o) a.inge tain.q i aa Utc!xo.tddy [ ,,, g;,- >d ucaq

M h 9

  • e 4

6 lIm S

e N

l .

6 ar, -

o I vs c4 i un 14

. O e LA.

.. I to g

N

._t I I

N I

m ,

itJ .

, n: .

4 On-O .

m b l i

1 I to N

I I

l I

4 -

~

I I

I .

8 O e co g N 01 m

I

. h 1.

  • e U a

D c

R3 g

_ ~ - -

_. *P O O O O O O O O O O O ci o o o ,--

3% g) to e e6 (4 . r-- N. La to sf m W c- y 16 acunpca,g jo

_-(4) JDl40j .t0'4X'O'd ($Q '4 GOD) !!j UO. tot]

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

a

, e r; v.

4

.M >,

'g-- .g n l- to a . o - - -

a M

.w v.

s.? .

re

-o-

' l -*

e-4

= -.

C.)

z-

=

uJ-O c

.-p,O:

c .

L l--

.,- - - .e'n-M' 4s L' . --

1 o v

L C t P <

c.

z o

=

n

,Ic.

of O

n m.

m:

m, a:

a w

we N

g * .c g ty O- s -

L rJ

=

i i :6 6 s

o. CO. -

to. Q-ca

- - o -o- -o. o

, (at!/atost G) ue60.ip41 uopo.uoa eGuaa.

.17 s .

4

3.4' Boron-Analysis Boron analysis is not typically run on the condensate, feedwater, main steam or heater drains during normal operation of the unit.

Data was collected during the. January low power soak which typically show~

e d boron levels of 2.0 to 4.0 ppm in the main steam, condensate and feed trains. During this same time frame, January 23 through

'27, 1980, the steam generators were being maintained at approximate -

ly 50 ppm as per our boron ' soak procedure requirements. Since this soak, boron has .been maintained at 5 - 10 ppm in the generators at

--power operating . conditions, with the values being reduced to 1 ppm

-in corrolation with the unit shutting down.

3.5 0xygen, Ammonia, pH and Cation Conductivity The dissolved oxygen levels in the steam generators have been main-tained at the non-detectable level, i.e., <0.005 ppm; the pH values have been maintained at a value in excess of 7.0 with an accompany-ing ammonia value of 0.15 to 0.40 ppm. The cation conductivity has remained below the 2.0 pmhos limit except during load reductions, when hideout return has been experienced, and during a condenser leak on March 12, 1980. In both cases proper action was taken to bring the units back into operating specs.

J t

18' OW'"

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19320A642&oldid=2489920"