ML20070V207
| ML20070V207 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1983 |
| From: | Shook T FRANKLIN INSTITUTE |
| To: | Mccracken C, Rajan J NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20070V197 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-81-130, CON-NRC-3-81-130 NUDOCS 8302170111 | |
| Download: ML20070V207 (2) | |
Text
.
INFORMAL TECHNICAL CGSMUNICATION Date January 7,1983 To:
Jai Rajan/Conrad McCracken From:
Ted Shook' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Franklin mesearch Center Washington, D. C.
20555 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY)
Reference Mic Contract NRC-03-81-130 FEC Project C5506. Assignment 10 MRC TAC No.
FRC Generic Tcpic THI-l Plant TMI-1 FRC Task (s)
Title:
Attachment:
List of references from Licensee Final Report Messages n.e request for the above references is hereby submitted as a result of the review of the Licensee final report. We feel.that a review of these references is necessary for the preparation of our TER. The request is made in accordance with C. McCracken's memo of December 20, 1982.
i I
i Copy of message form Em13XX NOTE TO SENDER: Include l
plus attachments to:
attachments if information is pertinent to program management.
t S. S. Bajwa NRC Performance Monitor Herbert Bramer NRC Lead Project Manager Conrad McCracken FRC Distribution:
SPC, SP, TAS LL,BS, VL, CD Revised 4/20/82
~ _Research. Center nklin 8302170111 830207 PDR ADOCK 05000289 P
.f.
ATTAGMENT TO INFORMAL TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION DATED 1/7/83 'to JAI RMAN/CONRAD Ma.CRAMEN OF NRC RE NRC-03-81-130, ASSIGNMENT #10, TMI-1 1
i i
We hereby request the following references given in GPU Topical l
Report #008, Rev. 1:
(1) OTSG Repair Safety Evaluation Report, Aug.1982.
(19) GPUN SP-1101-22-009 OTSG Kinetic Tube Expansion Process Monitoring and Inspection. Rev. 2 (23) Three Mile Island Unit Once *;. rough Steam Generator Repair Kinetic Expansion Technical Report - November 1, 1982 - Draft.
(48) B&W Document, Engineering Criteria for Tube Repair at
'IMI-1 #51-1137529-00.
r*
1 s h. ~R..,<,c.
... u.:
~
ENCLOSURE 2 1149 Regency Dr.
Columbus, Ohio 43220 January 3, 1983 Mr. Vinctor Benaroya, Chief Chemical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Review of GPUN Topical Report 008, Rev.1, " Assessment of TMI-l Plant Safety for Return to Service after Steam Generator Repair," and Request for Additional Information.
Dear Mr. Benaroya,
I have reviewed the above report, which was submitted to NRC by GPNU in support of their recommissioning activities on TMI-l OTSGs.
In order that I may complete my TER by the target date of 1/28/83, I have requested below additional information regarding GPNU's recommisioning activities.
1.
Regeneration of Polythionic Species Throughout the above report, it is assumed that the aggressive polythionic species that gave rise to the problem ~ in the first place will not be regenerated during subsequent cold lay-up, particularly when the system is open to air.
In previous communications, I have emphasized that metal sulfides, such as iron sulfide (Fe S, Fe S,
g, FeS ) and ni kel sulfide, may undergo oxidation to form S
Fe 2
polythionates. Th reaction involved, e.g.
2MS + H O + 20
> 2MO + S O
+ 2.H (1) 2 2
2 are well known in inorganic chemistry, and the sensitivity of many sulfides to oxidation is amply demonstrated by the fact that many tend to be pyrophoric. The scenario that I raised previously was that the polythionates, which were initially present, will have reacted with the metal surface to form sulfides, e.g.
2-2-
M+S0
+
23 3
during lay-up or HFT, but might then be regenerated during subsequent exposure to oxygen according to Reaction (1).
Whether or not this process actually occurs will have an important bearing on the clean-up' procedures which should be adopted. Accordingly, I wish to request GPNU to supply details of any experimental work which has been performed to date with regard to the oxidative regeneration of polythionic species.
9, FW m A. t, t V dQ/L-Q/ 7(d1 1 [
' if::..Ce-.'T'i*u.l*
+
2.
Desulfurization Frocedures GPUN's plans for desulfurization of the 'IMI -1 RCS are still unclear. Accordingly, I request additional information on the circumstances under which they consider desulfurization to be
. tiecessary and, more importantly, the circumstances under which they consider that it is not.
3.
Intergranular Corrosion The latest submission from GPUN indicates that they are able to detect intergranular attack on the ID surfaces with a correlation approaching 1004. If so, this is indeed a considerable improve-ment in the sensitivity of ECT over that indicated in previous submissions by their technical people.
In my view, the value of.
ECT would be greatly enhanced if ID ICA can be detected, since it is possible (probable?) that cracks may nucleate at sites of IGA.
i Accordingly, I request that full details be provided of the tests i
that were carried out to qualify ECT as a mean of detecting IGA.
4.
Stress Corrosion Cracking Tests Many of the stress corrosion cracking tests that have been carried out employed 10% NaOH as the test medium. However, our principal concern is with cracking due to sulfur species of intermediate oxidation state (e.g. polythionates), which may be regenerated by, for example, reaction (1) above.
GPU personnel should provide a rationale for the choice of sodim hydroxide as the test medi m.
In a related matter, a test carried out at Oak Ridge indicates that the critical concentration of thiosulfate for cracking of sensitized I-600 lies between 1 and 5 ppm (page 22). However, in the Repaired Tubing Corrosion Tests (RFCTs) described on page 23, it is stated that the tests were conducted in a solution containing 1 opm thiosulfate plus 1 ppm chloride. Because thiosulfate is the active agent, it appears that the. negative result obtained by GPUN in their RTCTs may merely reflect the fact that they did not have a sufficiently j
high thiosulfate concentration to render the test meaningful. GPU's ccaments on this matter would be most helpful.
5.
Reactivation of SCC At various points throughout the report, GPU states that "corro-sion tests indicate that the cracking mechanism has~ been arrested and does not reactivate in low sulfur water chemistry "(e.g. p5). This claim does not appear to be adequately supported by the tests de-scribed in the report. Accordingly, A reques' is made of GPU to f
supply details of r 11 tests that they have carried out to support their position.
4 I
-,-.-_-.--,a.
4.
a :: # ;_ ;;.v 'y;.:...'..,
')
s e
.e I look forward to receiving the information requested above so that I can complete my TERs early in February.
In the meantime, I will be in New Zealand, where I can be reached by telephone at 64-9-479-5195 or by addressing mail'to Dr. D.D. Macdonald c/o Mr. L.G. Macdonald 34 Oban Road Brown's Bay Auckland New Zealand Yours
- cerely, D.D. Macdonald w
i s
4 u
n, Requ2st for Additional Information for PNL to Complete Review of-GPUNC Topical 008. Re/. 1 1.
On page 13, discussion on sulfur's role in the overall cracking problem is not clear.
Under what conditions does sulfur cause this type of cracking?
2.
On page 18, a table should be provided to compare the temperature, pressure, chemistry of RCS in the core and the S/G. i.e. what are the conditions which lead to S/G tube cracking?
3.
Whate are the effects of radiation on oxidation of sulfur?.
~
4.'
What are the nature of all tests related to critical path and how long are these tests?
5.
On page 10, reduced sulfur species were the factors which caused the tube to crack, why is sodium thiosulfate itself excluded?
6.
Where is carbon observed, the tube I.D. or~ the cracking surface?
7.
What is the stability of-sulfur species as a function of ph?
8.
Are there any records on 02 concentration during S/G layup?
9.
Provide a table chronologically listing all. sulfur species and their oxidation states throughout the sequence of the incident.
- 10. Was the core barrel assembly bow immersed in the reactor coolant?
- 11. Have any fuel assemblies been examined or inspected since the cracking incident?
- 12. On Table 3-1, sulfur analysis will be once a month, what is the
~
rational?
13.
Page 23, all test related to tubing repair task, who will do three tests? What is their previous experiences (i.e. are they qualified)?
14.
Suggest a meeting to discuss entire desulfurization issue..
i
- ,. -h.;. $.y;i.
- , : ' >
~
u Request for Additional Information for BNL to from BNL complete review of GPUNC Topical 008 Rev. 1 1.
Provide all latest results regarding sulfur cleanup?
2.
Describe the nature and techniques to be used for sulfur cleanup?.
Who will do it? What ir, their experience?
3.
What:.are the accuracy and validity of sulfur analyses in the report?
4.
Request Ref. 28 GPUN-TDR-359.
5.
Provide reports on all supporting systems inspections.
6.
Suggest a meeting to discuss entire desulfurization issue.
i i
4 l
l t
I
,