Feedwater Heater Source Book

Life Cycle Management Sourcebooks
Volume 10: Feedwater Heaters
Technical Report
Life Cycle Management

SourcebooksVolume 10:
Feedwater Heaters
1009073
Final Report, December 2003
EPRI Project Manager

J. Carey
EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA
800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com
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
ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow
Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169,
(925) 609-1310 (fax).
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright 2003 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CITATIONS
This report was prepared by
Framatome ANP
400 South Tryon St.
Charlotte, NC 28285
Principal Investigators
J. Hamlen
P. Clay
This report describes research sponsored by EPRI.
The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Life Cycle Management SourcebooksVolume 10: Feedwater Heaters, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
2003. 1009073.
iii
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
EPRI is producing a series of Life Cycle Management Planning Sourcebooks, each containing a
compilation of industry experience and data on aging degradation and historical performance for
a specific type of system, structure, or component (SSC). This sourcebook provides information
and guidance for implementing cost-effective life cycle management (LCM) planning for
feedwater heaters.
Background
Industrys cost for producing LCM plans for the many important SSCs in operating nuclear
plants can be reduced if LCM planners have an LCM sourcebook of generic industry
performance data for each SSC they intend to addresssee Life Cycle Management Planning
SourcebooksOverview Report (EPRI 1003058). The general objective of EPRIs LCM
sourcebook effort is to provide system engineers with generic information, data, and guidance
they can use to generate a long-term equipment reliability plan for plant SSCs. These consist of
aging and obsolescence management plans that are optimized for plant performance and
economics. The long-term equipment reliability plan or LCM plan for the plant SSC combines
industry experience and plant-specific performance data to provide an optimum maintenance
plan, schedule, and expense profile throughout the plants remaining operational life.
Objectives
To provide plant engineers or their expert support with a compilation of generic information,
data, and guidance needed to create a plant-specific LCM plan for the mechanically passive
components of nuclear power plant feedwater heaters.
Approach
Experts in the maintenance and aging management of feedwater heaters followed the Life Cycle
Management Planning SourcebooksOverview Report. They defined the scope of the physical
system (the boundary) and the scope of the components to be included in the study. They then
compiled information and data on historical industry performance of selected feedwater heaters
within the scope and presented technical guidance for preparing plant-specific LCM plans. Prior
to publication, the sourcebook was reviewed by EPRI LCM utility advisors.
Results
This sourcebook contains information on typical boiling water reactor (BWR) and pressurized
water reactor (PWR) feedwater heaters. Information includes performance issues, reliability
information, failure rate determination, component aging mechanisms, aging management
maintenance activities, equipment upgrades, and replacements. Typical alternative plans for life
cycle management are delineated. The sourcebook includes an extensive list of references.
EPRI Perspective
This reporttogether with the LCM process defined in the EPRI LCM Implementation
Demonstration Project (EPRI 1000806)should enable the preparation of plant-specific LCM
plans for feedwater heaters with substantially less effort and cost than if planners/engineers had
to gather all the generic information themselves. This sourcebook captures both industry
experience and the expertise of the authors related to feedwater heaters. Using this sourcebook,
planners and engineers need only to add plant-specific data and information to complete an
economic evaluation and overall LCM plan for feedwater heaters.
EPRI plans to sponsor additional LCM sourcebooks for other plant SSC types. The process of
using sourcebooks as an aid in preparing LCM plans will improve as the industry gains
experience in this area. EPRI welcomes constructive feedback from users. As EPRI integrates
LCM analysis with development of equipment reliability technology starting in 2004, it also
plans to incorporate lessons learned in future LCM sourcebook revisions.
Keywords
Life cycle management
Aging management
Nuclear asset management
Feedwater heater
Heat exchanger
Tube
System reliability
Component reliability
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The technical contributions, review, and comment by the following individuals greatly enhanced
this document and are appreciated:
Patrick Clay, Framatome ANP
Bert Mayer, Framatome ANP
Cliff Munns, Framatome ANP
Mitch McFarland, Framatome ANP
EPRI Expert Reviewers
Alan Grunsky, EPRI
Sharon Parker, EPRI
George Sliter, EPRI
Gary Toman, EPRI
vii
CONTENTS
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 1-1

2 LCM SOURCEBOOK INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 2-1
2.1
Purpose of LCM Sourcebook .................................................................................... 2-1
2.2
Relationship of Sourcebook to LCM Process ............................................................ 2-1
2.3
Basis for Selection of Feedwater Heaters for an LCM Sourcebook ........................... 2-1
3 BASIC INFORMATION ON FEEDWATER HEATERS ........................................................ 3-1

3.1
Safety and Operational Significance.......................................................................... 3-1
3.2
Feedwater Heater Function and Configurations ........................................................ 3-1
3.3
Feedwater Heater System and Component Boundaries...........................................3-14
3.4
Scope of Equipment Covered by the Feedwater Heater Sourcebook .......................3-14
4 HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE DATA FROM INDUSTRY OPERATING

EXPERIENCE......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1
Nuclear Industry Experience ..................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.1
Qualitative Data ................................................................................................ 4-4
4.1.2
Quantitative Data (EPRI, INPO EPIX/NPRDS, NRC)........................................ 4-8
4.1.3
Maintenance Rule............................................................................................4-12
4.1.4
EPRI PM Basis Templates ..............................................................................4-14
4.2
Generic Communications and Other Reports ...........................................................4-18
4.2.1
NRC Communications .....................................................................................4-19
4.2.2
INPO SEE-IN Communications .......................................................................4-20
4.2.3
INPO NPRDS/EPIX Data.................................................................................4-23
4.2.4
Experience in Fossil Power Generation and Industrial Facilities ......................4-26
4.3
Codes and Standards (Mandatory, Guidance, Associations, Societies) ...................4-28
4.4
Plant Performance Enhancement Program Technical Library ..................................4-30
4.5
Generic Industry Failure Rate Estimation Summary .................................................4-30
ix
5 GUIDANCE FOR PLANT-SPECIFIC SSC CONDITION & PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1
Compiling Feedwater Heater Operating and Performance History ............................ 5-1
5.1.1 Feedwater Heater Condition Reviews (Work Orders, Failures Trends, Lost
Power Generation, Trips, Preventive Repairs, Replacements, Refurbishments) ............ 5-2
5.1.2
Review of Diagnostic Tests and Monitoring Devices/Data ................................ 5-3
5.2
Review of Current Maintenance Plans .....................................................................5-11
5.3
Current Condition and Performance Assessment.....................................................5-11
5.4
Condition Monitoring Technologies, Tests, and Diagnostics.....................................5-13
5.4.1
System Condition Monitoring ...........................................................................5-13
5.2.4
Component Condition Monitoring ....................................................................5-15
5.5
Water Chemistry and Corrosion ...............................................................................5-17
5.6
Feedwater Heater Repairs (Corrective Maintenance)...............................................5-18
5.6.1
Tube Leak Detection Methods .........................................................................5-19
5.6.2
Tube Repair.....................................................................................................5-20
5.6.3
Tube Sleeving .................................................................................................5-21
5.6.4
Tubesheet and Tubesheet Joints.....................................................................5-21
5.6.5
Shell Repairs ...................................................................................................5-22
5.6.6
FW Heater Cleaning ........................................................................................5-23
5.6.7
Spare Parts .....................................................................................................5-23
5.7
Heater Access..........................................................................................................5-24
6 GENERIC AGING AND OBSOLESCENCE ASSESSMENT ............................................... 6-1

6.1
Aging Effects and Mechanisms Review (Aging Matrix).............................................. 6-1
6.2
Expected Lifetimes of Feedwater Heaters................................................................. 6-6
6.3
Technical Obsolescence ........................................................................................... 6-6
6.4
Expected Lifetimes for Preventive Replacement or Redesign ................................... 6-8
7 GENERIC ALTERNATIVE LCM PLANS ............................................................................. 7-1

7.1
Plant Operating Strategies and Types of LCM Planning Alternatives ........................ 7-1
7.1.1
Plant Strategy 1: Operate plant for currently licensed period of 40 years......... 7-1
7.1.2
Plant Strategy 2: Operate plant for 60 years with license renewal.................... 7-2
7.1.3 Other Plant Strategies: (Power Uprate, Early Decommissioning, >60

Years) 7-2
7.2
Examples of Suitable Alternative LCM Plans............................................................. 7-3
7.3
Hypothetical Illustration of an LCM Planning Alternative for Feedwater Heaters........ 7-4
7.3.1
Alternative A Base Case................................................................................ 7-4
7.3.2
Alternative B Step Increase in NDE Examinations of the FW Heaters ........... 7-5
7.3.3
Alternative C Major Maintenance (Tube Rebundle, etc.)................................ 7-5
7.3.4
Alternative D FW Heater Replacement .......................................................... 7-5
7.3.5
Composite Evaluation....................................................................................... 7-6
7.4
Additional Evaluation of FW Heater Options.............................................................. 7-7
8 GUIDANCE FOR ESTIMATING FUTURE FAILURE RATES .............................................. 8-1

9 INFORMATION SOURCES AND REFERENCES................................................................ 9-1
10 ACRONYMS .....................................................................................................................10-1
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 (a) LCM Planning Flowchart SSC Categorization and Selection ......................... 2-3
Figure 2-1 (b) LCM Planning Flowchart Technical and Economic Evaluation ....................... 2-4
Figure 2-1 (c) LCM Planning Flowchart Implementation....................................................... 2-5
Figure 3-1 Basic Outline of Plant Feedwater Heater Arrangement (items 1 through 6 are
the feedwater heaters)..................................................................................................... 3-2
Figure 3-2 Cutaway View of a Typical Feedwater Heater (double-zone) ................................. 3-3
Figure 3-3 Single Zone Feedwater Heater .............................................................................. 3-4
Figure 3-4 Double Zone Feedwater Heater ............................................................................. 3-4
Figure 3-5 Long and Short Drains Cooler Outline.................................................................... 3-6
Figure 3-6 Vertical Channel-Down Feedwater Heater (showing condensing and subcooling zones) ................................................................................................................. 3-8
Figure 3-7 Vertical Channel-Up Feedwater Heater.................................................................. 3-9
Figure 3-8 Bolted Pass Partition.............................................................................................3-11
Figure 3-9 Welded Pass Partition...........................................................................................3-12
Figure 4-1 SYSMON Access Screen System 18 Extraction Steam, Feedwater
Heaters & Drains ............................................................................................................4-12
Figure 4-2 SYSMON Outline Plan ..........................................................................................4-13
Figure 5-1 Eddy Current Flowchart (from EPRI 1003470) ....................................................... 5-8
Figure 5-2 Summary of FW Heater Problems and Possible Causes (from EPRI 1003470) ....5-16
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4-1 Frequency of Initiating Events for Plant Faults ........................................................ 4-3
Table 4-2 Summary of Industry Database Search Results for FW Heaters (Operating
Experience) ....................................................................................................................4-11
Table 4-3 Feedwater Heater PM Basis Template...................................................................4-15
Table 4-4 Failure Locations, Degradation Mechanisms, and PM Strategies...........................4-16
Table 4-5 LER Evaluation (from INPO SEE-IN database) ......................................................4-21
Table 4-6 NPRDS Feedwater Heater Search Results - Summary ..........................................4-23
Table 4-7 NPRDS Feedwater Heater Search Results Specific Components and
Consequences ...............................................................................................................4-24
Table 4-8 EPIX System/Component Search Results for Feedwater Heaters..........................4-25
Table 4-9 EPIX Word Search Results for Feedwater Heaters (unique items).........................4-26
Table 4-10 Damage Incidence for FW Heaters (Fossil) From Survey (EPRI 7417) .............4-27
Table 4-11 Operating Experience Data for FW Heater Failure Rate Determination................4-31
Table 5-1 Feedwater Heater Responses (to plant changes) from EPRI TR-107422-V1 ......5-14
Table 5-2 Troubleshooting Feedwater Heater Problems (from EPRI 1003470) ......................5-15
Table 5-3 Recommended Spart Parts for FW Heaters (from EPRI 1003470) .........................5-23
Table 6-1 FW Heater Summary Aging Mechanisms & Effects.............................................. 6-2
Table 6-2 Application of Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria ..................................................... 6-7
Table 7-1 FW Heater Composite Evaluation for LCM Planning (generic) ................................ 7-6
xv
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Life Cycle Management (LCM) Planning Sourcebook for feedwater heaters will help plant
engineers and/or expert consultants in preparing a life cycle management plan (a long-term
reliability plan) for the feedwater heaters at their plant. The generic information and guidance
presented in this document are expected to help plant engineers focus on areas where there may
be significant opportunities for cost-effective improvements in long-term plans. Use of this
sourcebook will help reduce the cost of preparing a plant-specific LCM plan for feedwater
heaters.
Guidance consists mainly of generic industry information, data, and references on feedwater
heaters. This sourcebook identifies component aging mechanisms together with the maintenance
activities to manage them, as well as any applicable obsolescence issues and available
management options. Guidance is provided on how to build alternative LCM plans that can be
considered for long-term planning for the critical components in the system. This sourcebook
provides sample generic LCM plan alternatives to serve as starting points for plant-specific
applications. Depending upon the level of detail desired for the plant-specific LCM plan, the
generic data in this sourcebook may allow plant engineers to identify areas where significant
cost-effective improvements or reductions in maintenance activity can be realized and where
long-term planning for emerging obsolescence issues can be developed.
This sourcebook also contains lessons learned from the LCM Planning Demonstration Project by
providing guidance in the evaluation of plant-specific data, selection of plant operating
strategies, and feasible alternative LCM plans. A comprehensive reference listing is included to
give the utility engineer additional resources for consultation.
In a companion document, the LCM Planning Sourcebook Overview Report (EPRI 1003058)
[Ref. 1], LCM planning process-oriented information is presented as well as additional generic
guidance for the preparation of plant-specific LCM plans. The sourcebook and overview report
are meant to be used in conjunction, with the sourcebook addressing what to evaluate and the
overview report addressing how to evaluate.
The Feedwater Heater reliability issues identified and addressed by this study are :
Tube Vibration, Erosion, Cracking, and Corrosion
Shell Erosion and Corrosion
Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint Problems
Drains Cooler Zone Erosion
Impingement Plate (baffle, shield, drain inlet, etc.) Erosion

1-1
Executive Summary
Tubesheet Erosion and Inlet Tube Erosion
Adequacy of Feedwater Heater Performance Monitoring, Test Methodology & Frequency,

and Repair Techniques
Secondary Side Water Chemistry
The most sensitive components are the tubes, and their expected reliability and lifetime are based
on the material involved. Sections 5 and 6 address these issues. Internals problems are often
identified when the tubes are being inspected, and their failures (erosion, cracking) will often
cause vibration problems leading to tube failure. Problems with FW heater shells (minor cracks
and small areas of thinning) are relatively simple to repair via standard welding techniques if
identified early, but a shell that has lost much of its thickness over a large area is a major
corrective maintenance problem.
The potential candidate approaches for formulating feedwater heater LCM plans as alternatives
are identified in Section 7. These alternatives are options for consideration beyond the plant
current base case for SSC inspection and maintenance. They include the following cases:
Adjusting the frequency of time-directed maintenance to enhance the reliability of the

feedwater heaters (this includes more frequent inspections of the tubes and shell).
Increasing the scope of NDE (more tubes, shell welds, major portions of the shell etc.)
Performing major maintenance on FW heaters that have experienced problems (replacing

individual tubes, tube re-bundles, internals repair, etc.)
Replacement of an entire FW heater
The potential for license renewal will also drive plants to consider when to replace feedwater
heaters, depending upon refurbishment budgets and current heater reliability. The expected
lifetime of stainless steel tubes is approximately 20 years (see Section 6.4 of this sourcebook),
and engineers will need to plan accordingly as they perform LCM planning.
1-2
2
LCM SOURCEBOOK INTRODUCTION
2.1
Purpose of LCM Sourcebook
As indicated in the Life Cycle Management (LCM) Sourcebook Overview Report [Ref. 1], an
LCM sourcebook is a compilation of generic information, data, and guidance an engineer
typically needs to produce a plant-specific LCM plan for a system, structure, or component. The
sourcebook will enable plant engineers or outside experts to develop an LCM plan with
substantially less effort than if starting from scratch. The engineer need only compile and then
add plant-specific data and information to complete an economic evaluation and LCM plan for
the feedwater heaters (the subject of this report).
It must be recognized that not all generic information in a sourcebook applies to every plant.
Designs, layouts, and operational conditions are different from plant to plant. Some of the data
can assist in the establishment of a benchmark when performing plant-specific LCM planning.
The data may also show indicators or precursors to problems not yet experienced at a given unit.
Caution and guidance is therefore provided in the plant-specific guidance sections of this report
(Sections 5, 7, and 8) for the application and use of the generic feedwater heater information.
These sections also contain useful tips and lessons learned from the EPRI LCM Plant
Implementation Demonstration Program [Ref. 2] and various plant-specific LCM plans.
2.2
Relationship of Sourcebook to LCM Process
The process steps for LCM planning are detailed in the EPRI LCM Sourcebook Project
Overview Report [Ref. 1]. The LCM Planning flowcharts in Figures 2-1 through 2-3 of this
feedwater heater sourcebook are the same as Figure 1-1 of the LCM Sourcebook Overview
Report. The chart is segmented into the four elements of the LCM planning process: 1) SSC
categorization/selection, 2) technical evaluation, 3) economic evaluation, and 4) implementation.
Process step numbering has been maintained consistent with the LCM Sourcebook Overview
Report.
2.3
Basis for Selection of Feedwater Heaters for an LCM Sourcebook
The feedwater heaters were selected for the preparation of an LCM sourcebook by EPRImember utility advisors for the following reasons:
Feedwater heaters are present in both BWR and PWR plants
They are important to power production and plant efficiency

2-1
LCM Sourcebook Introduction
They are subject to significant operating stress and degradation
They have a history of chronic maintenance problems
Their technical data are available in a number of previous EPRI technical reports
Improvements in feedwater heater operation directly affect the plant thermal cycle.
Section 3.4 contains further information on the nature of components and their scope with
respect to reliability and LCM planning.
2-2
Figure 2-1
(a) LCM Planning Flowchart SSC Categorization and Selection
2-3
Figure 2-1
(b) LCM Planning Flowchart Technical and Economic Evaluation
2-4
Figure 2-1
(c) LCM Planning Flowchart Implementation
2-5
3
BASIC INFORMATION ON FEEDWATER HEATERS
3.1
Safety and Operational Significance
Though feedwater heaters are non-safety related, they are important to power generation because
they serve to help optimize plant thermal efficiency. Loss of feedwater heating may impose
severe stress on the plant in terms of increased heat flux in the fuel and increased stress (as well
as associated fatigue) on equipment such as feedwater nozzles, headers, and piping. Loss of
feedwater heating will impact plant thermal performance. Most repairs can be performed online, but do require power reductions and heater isolations. If a Low-Pressure (LP) feedwater
heater must be removed from service, an entire string must be isolated. The remaining string(s)
will then be required to supply the entire feedwater flow requirements. Depending upon the
plant design, the unit may need to be derated to approximately 80% of the rated power. If a
High-Pressure (HP) feedwater heater string is removed from service, the unit may have to be
derated to approximately 50% of rated power to make the necessary repairs. In addition, the
repairs are often conducted in high temperature environments, under cramped conditions and
with high humidity, making working conditions difficult. In terms of power generation and
maintaining capacity factor, feedwater heater operation is very important to nuclear plants, both
financially and with respect to thermal efficiency. Changes in power plant output cause changes
in feedwater heating. The volume of feedwater flow (and the velocity) directly affects the
amount of heat transfer taking place in the feedwater heaters.
The primary references for this section are EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance
Guide) [Ref. 11], EPRI NP-4057, Volume 3 (Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater Handbook) [Ref.
23], and the Heat Exchanger Institute (HEI) Standards for Closed Feedwater Heaters [Ref. 30].
There are a variety of materials used in feedwater heater components. EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11]
provides a detailed description of these materials and their technical properties, particularly in
Section 8. Typical materials are discussed later in this section. Unless specifically noted, the
information in this sourcebook applies to both PWRs and BWRs equally.
3.2
Feedwater Heater Function and Configurations
This Section addresses Step 7 of Figure 2-1a, and provides a brief description of feedwater
heaters and basic information on the feedwater heating systems in typical BWR and PWR
nuclear power plants.
An outline of basic feedwater heater arrangement in a typical plant is shown in Figure 3-1.
3-1
Basic Information on Feedwater Heaters
Figure 3-1
Basic Outline of Plant Feedwater Heater Arrangement (items 1 through 6 are the feedwater
heaters)
The purpose of the feedwater heating system is to increase plant thermal efficiency by preheating
the condensate/feedwater prior to its entering the reactor vessel (BWR) or steam generator
(PWR). The system is comprised of various components and controls, which provide the
following functions:
Maintain proper water levels in the feedwater heaters and drains to provide maximum
efficiency of the system.
Supply heating steam to the feedwater heaters.
Provide a flow path for the return of the condensed extraction steam drains to the feedwater
and condensate systems.
Allow collection from the feedwater heater drains.
Prevent the entrapment of non-condensable gases.
Nuclear units require very large feedwater flows. There are generally five or six low-pressure
and one high-pressure heater in each string of feedwater heaters. There may be two or three
complete or partial strings of feedwater heaters. For example, there may be three low-pressure
strings and two high-pressure heater strings for each unit. The numbering of each feedwater
heater varies according to specific plant nomenclature. Some plants use the turbine extraction
th
stage (the steam supply for the heater), such as the 14 stage, etc. Some plants number the
3-2
heaters in numeric order for each string. For the purposes of this sourcebook, nuclear units are
assumed to have between 12 and 21 FW heaters, depending upon design and vintage.
A basic cutaway outline of a typical feedwater heater is shown below.
Figure 3-2
Cutaway View of a Typical Feedwater Heater (double-zone)
The feedwater heaters themselves are simply shell-and-tube heat exchangers, whereby the
extraction steam (shell side) is used to heat the feedwater (tube side). The system consists of low
pressure (LP) and high pressure (HP) feedwater heaters. The LP heaters are located on the
suction side of the feedwater pumps and are used to heat condensate from the condenser hotwell
before the water enters the feedwater pumps. The HP heaters are located on the discharge side of
the feedwater pumps and are used to further heat the feedwater before it enters the reactor vessel
(BWR) or the steam generators (PWR). The extraction steam system removes steam from
various points on the HP and LP turbines for use in preheating the condensate and feedwater to
improve overall thermal cycle efficiency. The condensate drained from the HP heaters is used
along with the extraction steam from the LP turbine to heat the feedwater in the LP heaters.
Some LP feedwater heaters are actually located in the condenser neck. Most BWRs are arranged
to cascade all heater drains back to the condenser, allowing the condensate to be demineralized
prior to being returned to the reactor vessel (as feedwater). Conversely, PWRs typically pump
part of the higher-stage heater drains flow forward to the next higher stage heater (see Fig. 3-1).
Nuclear plant high pressure feedwater heaters are generally of the two-zone design (condensing
and drains subcooling zones). Nuclear plant low pressure feedwater heaters are generally either
two-zone or single-zone (condensing only). Most feedwater heaters are oriented horizontally,
but some plants use vertically-oriented heaters, especially in plants with limited floor space.
BWRs are more likely to have vertically-oriented feedwater heaters.
The main portions of a typical feedwater heater are as follows: the channel, the condensing
zone, and the drains subcooling zone. The channel portion provides for the feedwater inlet and
outlet nozzles. There are two types of channel design configurations: full access and manway
3-3
access designs. The elliptical head and hemispherical head are manway access designs, and the
bolted removable cover and removable cover with a full opening are full access designs.
Channels are designed to minimize the effects of erosion on the tubesheet and to provide
convenient access for tubesheet plugging and other related maintenance. Channels also provide
a surge chamber that allows the feedwater flow to achieve a more uniform flow distribution
before entering the tubes. These portions of a feedwater heater are shown (as outlines) in
Figures 3-3 and 3-4, below.
Figure 3-3
Single Zone Feedwater Heater
Figure 3-4
Double Zone Feedwater Heater
3-4
The condensing zone is the largest zone in the feedwater heater. Steam is condensed as it
traverses through the condensing zone and passes over the tubes carrying the feedwater. Drains
from higher-pressure feedwater heaters flow into the condensing zone from the drains inlet
nozzle (the drains cascade to the upstream heater, which is a lower pressure heater). An
impingement plate is installed just inside this nozzle to protect the tubes from these flashing
drains. The vent system typically consists of one or more perforated vent pipes installed along
the length of the tube bundle. Many other designs are also used to accomplish this function.
Non-condensible gases collect in these pipes and then pass through shell vent connections to the
dearator of the main condenser, and are vented. BWR unit feedwater heater vent capacity is
usually higher due to the radioactive hydrogen and oxygen produced in the reactor.
The most common method of subcooling nuclear power plant feedwater heater drains is to
provide the feedwater heater with a full-pass partial-length drain subcooling zone (see Figure 3-5
for a view of the short and long drains cooler designs). This zone is designed to achieve crossflow of the drains on the outside of the tubes (which carry the feedwater). The cross-flow design
maximizes the heat transfer rate because the film coefficient is reduced by the perpendicular
flow.
In the horizontal heater, the full-pass short-end design requires the use of a siphon between the
nominal level in the heater in the condensing zone and the flooded level of the drain cooler zone.
This siphon results in a pressure lower than the shell pressure all around the inside of the drain
cooler zone shroud. In addition, it requires that a minimum pressure drop exist across the
entrance to the drain cooler zone to avoid flashing. The velocities through the shell side of the
drain cooler zone must be minimized to keep the pressure drop low in order to avoid tube
vibration.
In the long drain cooler design (Figure 3-5), the entire drain cooler shroud is flooded and there is
no pressure differential. In addition, a siphon is not required to reduce the possibility of flashing.
The long and short drain designs are shown in the following figures.
3-5
Long Drains
Short Drains
Figure 3-5
Long and Short Drains Cooler Outline
The pressure drop through the full-length drains cooler zone, for the same given fluid velocity, is
greater than the pressure drop through the short-end cooler zone (due to the greater length).
Feedwater heaters can be classified based on orientation: horizontal, vertical channel-up, or
vertical channel-down (see Figures 3-6 and 3-7 for the vertical orientation). The majority of
nuclear plant heaters are horizontal, while the majority of fossil heaters are vertical [Ref. 11]. A
vertical feedwater heater has considerably less fluid capacitance (volume of liquid contained in a
unit level change) than a horizontal feedwater heater. In some cases, for channel-down
applications, the shell of the heat exchanger is enlarged to increase the capacitance (sometimes
called a belly band). This design change has also been made to original equipment at some
plants. Considerations for vertical FW heaters involve proper distribution of steam and
condensate within the shell.
A vertical channel-up feedwater heater that includes drains cooling is subject to difficulties with
flashing during varying flow conditions (i.e., changes in plant load). In this design, the drains
cooler shrouding encloses several rows of tubes, and water level is maintained at the U-bend end
3-6
of the shell. These drains must be lifted to the top of the unit, and the potential for flashing is
high.
A horizontal heater provides more drains storage capacity, is easier to maintain, and requires
more floor space (and supports). A vertical channel-up heater uses less floor space, has
problems in the drains cooler zone design, is difficult to maintain, and is unable to have water
drained from the tubes. A vertical channel-down heater uses less floor space, has problems with
the drains cooler zone design, and is the most difficult heater to maintain. Appendix B of the
Heat Exchange Institute (HEI) Closed Feedwater Heater Standards [Ref. 30] provides a detailed
description of vertical feedwater heater issues.
The feedwater heaters are controlled by a series of level controllers and other instrumentation
controlling the vents, drains, and pumps. Feedwater heater controls have been addressed in a
separate EPRI LCM sourcebook, EPRI 1007425 [Ref. 6]. It is important to note that the level
within a feedwater heater is not the same at all locations along the tube length. The level can
vary, depending upon the position of the steam inlet (or inlets), the design of the internals, and
the flow through the unit. The level can vary significantly from the tubesheet to the U-tube end
of the heater, especially if the drain cooler velocities are high. Maintaining a suitable level at the
drain cooling zone inlet on short-end designs (operating under a siphon) is essential, in order to
prevent flashing and subsequent erosion/damage. It is especially important to maintain the level
well above the entrance at all times. The short-end drains cooler is capable of satisfactory
performance if properly designed and operated, but it does offer more of a challenge than the
long drains cooling design (due to the smaller space and therefore more sensitive parameter
control). Accurate knowledge of the liquid level is very important in the drains cooling zone of
any applicable feedwater heater.
The following figures show the vertical channel-down and the vertical channel-up configuration
for feedwater heaters. Further discussion about the unique difficulties associated with vertical
feedwater heaters is also found in EPRI 1003470, Appendix B (which addresses heaters in fossil
plants).
3-7
Figure 3-6
Vertical Channel-Down Feedwater Heater (showing condensing and sub-cooling zones)
3-8
Figure 3-7
Vertical Channel-Up Feedwater Heater
3-9
The feedwater heaters contain a number of sub-components (which are addressed in this report),
including tubes, tubesheets, baffles, shield plates (or impingement plates), tube tie rods and
spacers, tube supports, the drain nozzles, and the steam inlet and outlet nozzles. The heat
exchanger shell is an ASME pressure vessel and houses all the internals. The channel head is
removable so that access to the tubes and tubesheet can be provided. The tubes are typically Utubes which allow a double-pass for the feedwater through the shell. The components (and subcomponents) detailed in this report are as follows:
Shell
Channel and Manways
Pass Partitions, Plate and Cover
Tubesheet
Tubes
Tube Supports and Baffles
Shell Relief Valves
Vents
Nozzles
The shell is a pressure vessel that provides support for the feedwater heater internal components
and allows for the distribution of the extraction steam with a negligible pressure loss. The shell
is a level control reservoir for the heater drains system. The shell also acts as a cooler for the
condensed steam.
The channel serves as the inlet plenum for the feedwater/condensate into the heat exchanger.
The channel acts to redirect the flow from one tube pass to the next. The shape of the channel is
dictated by the feedwater pressure and by tube end accessibility considerations.
The pass partition divides the channel into feedwater inlet and outlet passes. There are three
types of pass partitions: welded, bolted, and floating. The pass partition cover can be welded or
bolted, depending upon maintenance access concerns. During plant operation, one half of the
channel is hotter than the other half. The radial growth of the hotter side is greater than the
colder side due to thermal expansion. This effect results in bending stresses at the pass partition
weld junction. Over time, cyclical pressure and thermal stress may lead to cracking around the
perimeter of the pass partition. A floating pass partition is welded only to the tubesheet face and
to the feedwater outlet nozzle. This is the most flexible design, and is used to reduce stresses in
the channel and the channel-to-tubesheet connection. Figures 3-8 and 3-9 show bolted and
welded pass partitions.
3-10
Figure 3-8
Bolted Pass Partition
3-11
Figure 3-9
Welded Pass Partition
The tubesheet is a plate with holes drilled in it for the tubes. Some tubesheet holes have tube
hole grooves that increase the holding force of the expanded tubes. Low-pressure feedwater
heaters tubesheets are generally composed of carbon steel plate, while high-pressure heater
tubesheets are generally composed of forged carbon steel. The tubesheets of nuclear highpressure heaters are typically 10-15 inches thick. Low-pressure tubesheets are typically 6-10
inches thick. Nuclear plant high-pressure heater tubes are always seal welded and roller
expanded to the tubesheet. Low-pressure heater tubes for PWRs are typically roller expanded to
a sufficient depth to meet ASME requirements, while the low-pressure tubes for BWRs are
generally welded due to access limits associated with the anticipated high radioactivity levels.
The tube design pressure is required by ASME and other governing codes to be equal to or
greater than the maximum normal pressure that will be experienced during operation. The
design minimum tube wall thickness for U-tube stainless steel is 0.035 inches and 0.028 inches
for straight stainless steel tubes. The minimum radius of the U-bends should be 1.5 times the
tube diameter.
3-12
Baffles and tube support plates are pinned supports for the tubes (in the shell). When properly
designed, the support plates can prevent damage to the tubes from excessive vibration. The
baffles direct the flow through the bundle. Baffles are used in the drains cooler zone to increase
the rate of single-phase heat transfer.
The shell relief valve is designed to protect the shell when the tube design pressure is greater
than the shell design pressure. The relief valve protects the shell in the case of tube or tubesheet
failure. BWRs must have a design to prevent a general discharge to the plant. The relief valve
should be sized to take the flow of one clean heater tube rupture (two open ends discharging
feedwater).
The vents on a feedwater heater remove non-condensible gases from the shell and tube side of
the heater during start-up and normal operation.
There are inlet and outlet nozzles on feedwater heaters for the connections to the feedwater
piping, the heater drains piping, the extraction steam piping, vent lines, and relief valves. There
are also instrument taps (as necessary). In addition, there are other appurtenances to the shell,
such as manways, flanges, hand-holds, lifting lugs, etc., but except for leakage events, these are
not addressed in this report.
These individual items are discussed in detail in EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance
Guide) [Ref. 11] and in EPRI NP-4057, Volumes 1-3 (Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater
Handbook) [23]. Much of the information and most of the figures in this LCM Planning
Sourcebook were taken from these two references.
The normal flow path for the feedwater in a nuclear power plant is typically described in the
following steps:
Condensate flows from the condensate demineralizers through the tubes of the fifth and
fourth point drain coolers.
The condensate flows through the tubes of the sixth through the second point heaters (in that
order).
The feedwater flows through the (reactor) feedwater pumps
The feedwater flows through the first point heater through to the reactor (BWR) or steam
generators (PWR).
Both the first- and second-point feedwater heaters (high-pressure heaters) typically have inlet
and outlet motor-operated isolation valves. Each of these two feedwater heaters has a bypass
line with a motor-operated isolation valve.
The feedwater is successively heated by extraction steam, starting with low pressure saturated
steam from the LP turbine to the sixth-point feedwater heater. Higher pressure saturated
extraction steam is used for subsequent feedwater heaters. The first-point feedwater heater
receives high pressure saturated extraction steam from one of the stages of the HP turbine.
Different plants use different numbering systems when classifying their feedwater heaters, such
3-13
that heater #1 is the first heater after the condensate pumps and heater #6 (for example) is the
closest to the steam generators (or the reactor vessel).
As outlined in Figure 3-1, extraction steam from the HP and LP turbines is sent to the shell side
of the feedwater heaters. As heat energy from the extraction steam is transferred to the
feedwater (which flows in the tubes), the steam is condensed and is collected in the drain
receiver (at the bottom of the feedwater heater). The energy given up to the feedwater causes the
steam to condense and collect. The drain path depends upon the location of the heater or drain
receiver in the heater string. The typical drain paths are shown in Figure 3-1. As previously
mentioned, for BWRs, the drain path for all the FW heaters is typically directly back to the
condenser, while for PWRs, the drain path is often forward to next higher-stage heater.
Drain flow paths, water levels, FW heater controls, and interlocks are discussed in further detail
in EPRI 1007425 (LCM Planning Sourcebook, Vol.6: Feedwater Heater Controls) [Ref. 6].
3.3
Feedwater Heater System and Component Boundaries
Considering the flowpath to be condensate to feedwater, the feedwater heaters are bounded on
the upstream side by the condensate system and also the extraction steam (sub-)system. The
downstream boundary is the feedwater system itself - prior to the FW isolation valves to the
reactor [BWR] or the steam generators [PWR]. The heater drains system also forms part of the
downstream boundary (for the drain flow back into the condenser). The low-pressure heaters are
typically part of the condensate system and the high-pressure heaters are typically part of the
feedwater system. Differences from one plant to the next may exist with respect to the actual
piping boundaries and system titles. Differences also exist between BWR and PWR plants,
although with respect to the feedwater heaters themselves, the shell and tube design is the same.
Figure 3-1 shows the typical outline for the feedwater heater arrangement.
3.4
Scope of Equipment Covered by the Feedwater Heater Sourcebook
Per the guidance contained in INPO document AP-913, Equipment Reliability Process
[Ref.32], if a failure of a component or its structural supports defeats or degrades an important
function or a function that is redundant to an important function, then it is considered a critical
component. As discussed in Section 3.1, feedwater heaters are not safety-related, so the critical
nature of the feedwater heater components is related to their importance for plant productivity.
The scope of this report includes only the passive mechanical components and sub-components
of nuclear plant feedwater heaters. The scope covers the most common mechanical components
contained in feedwater heaters found in both BWRs and PWRs. These include:
Shell
Tubes
Tubesheet
Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints
3-14
Tube Supports
Baffles
Impingement Plates
Nozzles
Vents
Active components such as instrumentation, controls, and valves, are excluded. Feedwater
heater controls are addressed separately in EPRI report 1007425 [Ref. 6]. Non-metallic
materials, such as insulation and gaskets, are not addressed by this sourcebook. In addition, FW
heater supports are considered to be structural components, and are not addressed by this
sourcebook.
The tubes are the most vulnerable component with respect to damage and are of the highest
concern with respect to surveillance and maintenance, so they are considered the most critical
components. As discussed in Section 4, erosion and wall thinning in FW heater shells has also
been observed, and one event (in 1999) involved the catastrophic rupture of a FW heater shell
due to erosion. Other heater damage has been noted due to cracked or broken impingement
plates or baffles (or end supports). Most of the surveillance and maintenance focus is on the
tubes, but the other components will be addressed as well (see Section 5 for a review of
condition monitoring and repair techniques).
3-15
4
HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE DATA FROM INDUSTRY
OPERATING EXPERIENCE
This section addresses Step 9 in the LCM planning flowchart (Figure 2-1b). The information
compiled in this section is to be used for a comparison or benchmark of plant-specific conditions
and operating experience. The qualitative data is intended as a checklist of potential conditions
affecting plant-specific performance, while the quantitative failure data may provide insight into
the potential for plant-specific enhancements and may help identify where improvements can be
made. For example, if the plant-specific component failures are much lower (e.g., by a factor of
3) than the generic data indicates, then one might conclude that the existing maintenance plan is
effective and that further improvements will be difficult to achieve. On the other hand, the
discrepancy between realized and industry typical failure rates might suggest that the current
maintenance on the equipment could be relaxed if high reliability is viewed as the result of
excessive maintenance practices that are not cost-effective.
Similarly, if the plant-specific component failure rates are substantially higher than the generic
industry failure rates presented in this section, or if the contribution of feedwater heaters to lost
power production significantly exceeds the generic values (for BWRs and PWRs), then
equipment replacement or major changes to current maintenance practices might be needed.
Also, if the reliability of an SSC falls below a certain level, replacement or other major
maintenance efforts will be required to satisfy Maintenance Rule performance criteria.
It should be noted that this section addresses failures and failure data rather than repair practices
and data. Some repair (and maintenance) techniques will be mentioned, but, in general, repair
times will be available from specific plant records and will depend upon plant-specific
maintenance practices. Monitoring techniques are addressed in Section 5. The Mean-Time-ToRepair (MTTR) will have an impact on system availability (with respect to the Maintenance
Rule). A further discussion of specific maintenance (preventive or repair) and troubleshooting is
found in Section 5.
Computing (or estimating) failure rates for components is not an exact science. Hundreds,
sometimes thousands, of event reports must be reviewed to determine which items are to be
directly characterized as failures for the components under review. In addition, for a subject like
feedwater heaters, the term failure will not mean the same thing among different utilities. Unlike
electronic components (instrumentation), which are replaced when they fail (and are relatively
easy to benchmark), many instances of feedwater heater failure are repaired without direct
component replacement. A catastrophic failure of a shell is obviously a failure. However, the
plugging of a single tube (possibly including adjacent tubes as insurance) may not be considered
a failure, but just good preventive maintenance.
4-1
Historical Performance Data from Industry Operating Experience
Because these events are characterized differently by different plants, any failure rate which is
estimated from INPO failure data (i.e., EPIX) is going to be lower than a true failure rate
experienced in the field. Likewise, some FW heaters may be inspected and/or repaired when the
plant is shut down for other reasons, and items identified during such work may not be classified
as failures, even though corrective maintenance is needed. Also, there are significant differences
between EPIX and NPRDS reports these differences are discussed in Sections 4.1.2 and 4.2.3.
There is a large amount of data from various sources related to industry experience presented in
Section 4 of this sourcebook; this data is tabulated and evaluated in the appropriate sub-sections,
and is summarized in Section 4.5, where the generic industry failure rate for FW heaters is
addressed. Section 4.5 presents the failure rate values necessary for unit-specific LCM planning.
4.1
Nuclear Industry Experience
This section contains information on failure data and the associated failure mechanisms for
nuclear power plant feedwater heaters. The information is presented in two forms: qualitative
and quantitative. The qualitative information describes the degradation mechanisms and effects
that apply to nuclear plant feedwater heaters, while the quantitative information identifies
industry failures and failure mechanisms (by listing specific events). The quantitative
information may be used to determine a generic industry failure rate, although subject to
uncertainty. The listing of the failures may be used to provide an understanding of the industry
experience as system and component engineers at specific plants evaluate LCM planning for
feedwater heaters at their units. The listing of events is detailed for each source where the
information was found, and is presented to highlight the applicable feedwater heater subcomponent involved (shell, tubes, baffles, shield plates, etc.). EPRI 1007425 (Life Cycle
Management Planning Sourcebooks, Volume 6: Feedwater Heater Controls) [Ref. 6] presents
this information for feedwater heater controls, so any problems with instrumentation and control
schemes will be listed there.
A comprehensive review of the available industry operating experience has been done to extract
the salient information and to present the data that the plant system or component engineer may
utilize in assessing the plant-specific performance of a feedwater heater. A variety of industry
databases were reviewed to identify problems that have been reported with feedwater heaters at
nuclear power plants. The industry sources used in this review include EPRI (previous technical
reports), INPO (EPIX/NPRDS), and NRC. The primary EPRI technical report referenced in this
Section is EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11]. To begin the
operating experience review, the proper place is to consider system failure contributions to plant
events. This information is available in NUREG/CR-5750 [Ref. 41], with the understanding that
this reference uses the words fault, failure, transient, and initiating event in generally the
same sense (in conflict with the typical safety analysis usage of these terms).
To provide an industry benchmark for generic historical SSC performance used in nuclear plant
PRA analysis, the NRC conducted a review of industry-wide plant initiating events for the period
1987-1995 (from NUREG/CR-5750) [Ref. 41]. The relevant data for the initial plant faults from
this report are tabulated separately for BWRs and PWRs in Table 4-1. Assuming that each fault
contributes equally to plant shutdowns (i.e., all plant trips are considered equivalent fault or
failure events with respect to consideration as data points), an estimate of the percentage of total
plant failures contributed by a specific SSC may be estimated. The table shows this system
contribution factor, on such a percentage basis.
4-2
This average generic SSC contribution can be used as an initial generic benchmark for the SSCspecific sourcebook (as a first step in the determination of an industry failure rate). These
factors, after comparison with plant-specific SSC failure rates, can be used in economic analysis
calculations to determine the impact on lost power generation attributed to the SSC under
review. For SSCs not represented in Table 4-1, it may be assumed that the generic industry
failure rate is negligible with respect to lost power generation. For feedwater heaters, the data
must be evaluated carefully because they are not specifically mentioned as a separate component,
but (as the table shows) feedwater problems are one of the leading items causing plant faults.
The following table presents data from NUREG/CR-5750 [Ref. 41], which compiled information
on the rates of initiating events for US nuclear units from 1987-1995. The data is based
primarily on operating experience derived from Licensee Event Reports. While the table does
not explicitly address feedwater heaters, it is clear that feedwater problems represent a significant
contribution factor (approximately 19% in BWRs and approximately 27% in PWRs) towards
plant faults (transients). If the loss of condensate flow is also considered, the percentages rise
almost another 3%.
Table 4-1
Frequency of Initiating Events for Plant Faults
SYSTEM-CATEGORY
ALL EVENTS
LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER
Initial Plant Faults IPF
Contribution %
Factor
BWR 658
PWR 1327
BWR 100
PWR 100
13
0.607
0.980
LOSS OF VITAL BUS
1.060
0.226
LOSS OF IAS
13
13
1.976
0.980
FIRE
10
21
1.520
1.583
INADVERTANT CLOSURE OF MSIVs
16
2.432
0.377
LOSS OF CONDENSER VAC.
27
13
4.103
0.980
TOTAL LOSS OF FW FLOW
24
62
3.647
4.672
LOSS OF NON-SAFETY BUS
20
0.760
1.507
LOSS OF AC I&C BUS
12
19
1.824
1.432
LOSS OF NON-SAFETY COOLING

WATER
16
34
2.432
2.562
PARTIAL MSIV CLOSURE
11
36
1.672
2.713
PARTIAL LOSS OF FEED WATER

FLOW
45
240
6.839
18.086
PARTIAL/TOTAL LOSS OF
CONDENSATE FLOW
18
36
2.736
2.713
EXCESSIVE FEEDWATER
49
61
7.447
4.597
VALID RPS TRIPS
64
132
9.726
9.947
REACTIVITY IMBALANCE
88
0.912
6.631
TURBINE TRIPS
173
284
26.292
21.402
MANUAL REACTOR TRIPS
55
48
8.359
3.617
SPURIOUS SSAs
14
22
2.128
1.658
OTHER TRIPS
89
177
13.523
13.338
4-3
Note that the word fault in this table does not automatically refer to an accident event, but
rather to an initial plant transient (see Table 2-1 of NUREG/CR-5750 for an outline of all faults
evaluated in the report). Some of them are accident events and some are just general transients.
NUREG/CR-5750 evaluates both.
As noted in the discussion on LERs, probably only a small number of these events (or faults) are
directly related to feedwater heaters. Other issues (valve problems, drain problems, feedwater
pump and feedwater recirculation problems) predominate, but some of these events are related to
feedwater heaters. When considering feedwater heater failure rates and the impact to overall
plant operation, it should be remembered that the greatest negative impact that feedwater heater
performance can have on the plant is the cost of replacement power (for a sudden component
failure). Feedwater heater repairs involve detailed and often difficult maintenance evolutions,
and replacement of a feedwater heater tube bundle or of the heater itself is considered only as a
last resort, once other options have been exhausted (tube plugging, sleeving, etc.).
With respect to this data for LCM planning, one step would be to take the overall FW system
initiating event rate (19% for BWRs and 27% for PWRs), review the plant-specific data to
remove contributions from FW heater controls problems, and then multiply the remaining value
by the number of trips, transients, and power reductions in a given period to determine a rate
specific to feedwater heaters. In order to remove the I&C portion of the FW event data, one
could use the data in Table 4-2, where (with the exception of the NPRDS information), only
about 10% of the failures linked to FW heaters are specific to the heaters themselves.
In summary, the NUREG/CR-5750 data confirms that FW systems and components contribute
significantly to industry productivity losses and warrant the preparation of formal LCM plans.
However, it would be difficult to determine a specific failure rate for feedwater heaters from the
data, and any estimates would have a large uncertainty range. Other information has been
reviewed to develop an estimated industry generic failure rate for feedwater heaters, as discussed
later in this section.
4.1.1 Qualitative Data
Qualitative data indicate several different failure modes from different aging/degradation
mechanisms for feedwater heaters. The qualitative data typically list and describe aging
mechanisms and/or effects, and may also describe various types of degradation. In the
terminology of aging management, life cycle management, and license renewal (see, for
example, SAND96-0344, NUREG-1800, or NUREG 1801), an aging mechanism results from
exposure to a stressor, usually an environmental or cyclical condition, and the mechanism causes
an aging effect in the SSC, which leads to degradation and ultimately to failure, in a specific
mode.
In SAND93-7070 [Ref. 7], The Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power
Plants Heat Exchangers, the stressors applicable to heat exchangers in nuclear power plants
are summarized as:
Mechanical
Hydraulic
4-4
Chemical
Electrical
Environmental (Thermal, Moisture, Radiation)
Mechanical stresses primarily involve fabrication issues and piping connection loads. Vibration
and thermal expansion are also considered mechanical issues.
Hydraulic stressors are loads imposed on heat exchanger components as a result of the pressure
and flow of fluid through the heat exchanger. The magnitude of the hydraulic stress is dependent
upon the characteristics of the process fluid, the design parameters of the heat exchanger, and the
severity of operation or duty that the heat exchanger is expected to encounter over its service life.
The fluid pressures exert stress on the heat exchanger shell, nozzles, tubes, tubesheets, channel
heads, and partitions (including impingement plates). Erosion is considered a hydraulic issue.
Process fluids react with the heat exchanger materials (internal components) and, depending
upon the specific mechanical composition, can cause the components to become stressed. This
stress can be localized and/or uniformly distributed throughout the heat exchanger internal
surfaces. The water chemistry issues related to feedwater heaters are discussed in further detail
in Section 5 of this report.
The only electrical stressor for heat exchangers is galvanic corrosion resulting from a coupling of
materials remote from one another on the galvanic series chart (anode to cathode). Galvanic
corrosion is addressed in EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11]. For the purposes of this report, it is not
considered to be a major degradation mechanism, because dissimilar metal couples are only
occasionally used in power plant functions (EPRI CS-3184) [Ref. 25]. Industry experience with
galvanic corrosion in feedwater heaters is limited.
The environmental stressors are detailed as follows: thermal stressors involve internal process
fluid temperature effects on heat exchanger components, moisture stressors involve external
humidity effects on the applicable heat exchanger components, and radiation stressors involve
the cumulative radiation effects on the applicable heat exchanger components. These stressors
are not considered as significant (particularly in comparison with the degradation mechanisms
and effects resulting from the mechanical, hydraulic, and chemical stressors). The aging
mechanisms and effects (i.e., the categories of problems) resulting from the important stressors
are summarized as follows (from Tables 1-5 and 2-2 of the Heat Exchanger AMG):
Fatigue
Corrosion
Stress Corrosion Cracking
Erosion
Embrittlement
Wear
Stress Relaxation
4-5
Creep
Fouling
In the text of the report (SAND93-7070, also the Heat Exchanger AMG), some of these aging
mechanisms and their sub-types are dismissed as non-significant (thermal embrittlement, creep,
thermal fatigue, irradiation-assisted stress corrosion, and neutron embrittlement). The remaining
categories are included for evaluation in the AMG. It should be noted that the scope of the Heat
Exchanger AMG does not include feedwater heaters, and steam is not addressed as a shell-side
fluid. But the principal discussions related to shell-and-tube heat exchangers are the same for
feedwater heaters, and the evaluations in the Heat Exchanger AMG provide an introduction into
other industry technical reports on feedwater heater maintenance, operation, and problem/failure
review. Note that fouling, while an important subject in the Heat Exchanger AMG and in other
general heat exchanger technical reports (such as EPRI NP-7552 [Ref. 16]), is not a serious
concern for feedwater heaters because the feedwater is boiler-quality water with strict chemistry
controls (as opposed to raw or filtered water, which is used in many critical heat exchangers in a
nuclear plant). Fouling is not a significant degradation mechanism for feedwater heaters.
The Heat Exchanger AMG details the sub-components in the following groupings (from Table 32 of the report):
Tubes / Coils
Tube Sheets
Shell / Nozzles / Internals
Waterbox / Channel Head / Divider Plates
Pressure Boundary Fasteners / Support Assembly
The Heat Exchanger AMG details typical heat exchanger materials as follows (Table 3-3):
Tubes / Coils
Austenitic Stainless Steel, Admiralty Brass, Copper-Nickel,

Titanium, Copper
Tube Sheets
Carbon Steel, Austenitic Stainless Steel, Muntz (copper

alloy)
Shell / Nozzles / Internals
Carbon Steel, Austenitic Stainless Steel
Baffle Plates
Divider Plates
Fasteners
Forged Stainless Steel, Forged Carbon Steel
Waterbox / Channel Head
This breakdown compares well with previous EPRI analysis of feedwater heaters. For example,
EPRI CS-1776 (Failure Cause Analysis Feedwater Heaters) [Ref. 18] details feedwater heater
problems in the following categories (from Table 2-1):
4-6
Steam Impingement
Tube Inlet Erosion
Drains Subcooler Flashing / Level Control Problems
Tube Vibration
Tube Plugging Problems
Corrosion
Unknown
Internal Failure
Head / Shell Leak
Tube-Tubesheet Joint Failure
Foreign Material Impingement
Tube Defects
The focus of this EPRI report was on fossil units, but the issues are the same for nuclear units.
The primary difference between feedwater heaters in fossil units and those in nuclear units is that
the fossil units typically have superheated steam and the nuclear units do not. Therefore, the
fossil units must have a de-superheating zone, which is not addressed in this sourcebook.
In EPRI NP-4057, Vol. 3, (Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater Handbook) [Ref. 23], the problems
with feedwater heaters are summarized as follows (from Section 3):
Problems in the Condensing Zone
Inadequate Venting Leading to Corrosion Problems and Thermal Deficiencies
Tube Damage Resulting from Inadequate Impingement Plates
Erosion Resulting from Inadequate Impingement Plates
Lack of Flash Chambers Causing Shell Erosion and Tube Damage
High Velocity Wet Steam Causing Erosion of Shells and Support Plates
Problems in the Drain Cooler Zone
Erosion of Tubes and/or Baffle Plates Resulting from Inadequate Water Level and/or
Inadequate Anti-Vortexing Design
Erosion Resulting from Excessive Pressure Drop and Flashing
High Drain Cooler Velocity Causing Vibration Damage, Baffle Plate Erosion
High Drain Cooler Velocity Resulting from Excessive Duty (i.e., a lower pressure FW heater
being isolated)
Inadequate Level Control Resulting in Erosion due to Flashing or Excessive Flow

4-7
Erosion and Tube Damage Resulting from Inadequate Plate Thickness
Erosion and Steam Flow from Tube/Plate Leakage
With respect to feedwater heater materials, EPRI CS-3184 (Corrosion-Related Failures in

Feedwater Heaters) [Ref. 25] contains an evaluation of feedwater heater tube corrosion
problems written from a materials standpoint. The following materials are addressed in separate
sections of that report:
Carbon Steel
Admiralty Brass
Copper-Nickel Alloys
Monel Alloy 400
Type 304 Stainless Steel
Titanium
In EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11], the feedwater heater
problems are categorized as follows:
Corrosion (general, galvanic, crevice, pitting, intergranular, stress, and flow-accelerated)
Erosion (tube inlet, tubesheet, impingement)
Vibration
Vibration is further broken down to address two flow-induced excitation mechanisms which
affect feedwater heater tubes: vortex shedding and fluidelastic whirling. The common tube
damage from vibration is labeled as follows: fretting, collision, and cracking.
In summary, it is clear that the environments and operating conditions in which feedwater
heaters operate can cause significant problems such as fatigue, erosion, corrosion, cracking, and
vibration. If not properly monitored, inspected, and maintained, the feedwater heaters will incur
damage over time, causing a negative impact to plant efficiency. The following section of this
report outlines specific numerical industry data on feedwater heater problems and failures.
4.1.2 Quantitative Data (EPRI, INPO EPIX/NPRDS, NRC)
Quantitative failure data is available for feedwater heaters, their structures, and their components
from a number of sources such as EPRI, INPO (EPIX/NPRDS, Plant Events database, O&MR,
SEE-IN, and LER), and NRC (LER and Generic Communications). It should be recognized that
such quantitative data has often been gathered for risk assessment or other safety-related
evaluations. As such, the data tends to reflect functional failures rather than degradation failures
(or discoveries), even though the degradation may reflect chronic problems and should be the
primary focus of maintenance activities. It should also be noted that not all component failures
at all plants are going to be listed in generic industry databases (i.e., this search cannot be
considered exhaustive). The NPRDS database covers events/items from approximately late 1976
to late 1996 and the EPIX database (the successor to NPRDS) covers items from 1997 to the
4-8
present. The INPO Plant Events Database contains summaries of events since 1991. Significant
events are further described in the INPO SEE-IN process (under SER, SEN, and SOER). The
NRC ADAMS search covers a period from late 1998 to 2003, with more documents being added
as the database is developed.
As described in the following paragraphs, a refining process is needed to conduct a useful search
of these industry databases. Extraneous items must be removed and actual SSC events must be
addressed.
Searches of the INPO databases (NPRDS, EPIX, and Plant Events) identified many items not
directly associated with feedwater heater components, such as condenser problems, valve
problems, secondary side I&C problems, secondary side piping problems, etc. For example, the
INPO NPRDS search by system (checking the Feedwater, Condensate, and Extraction Steam
systems) and component (checking Heat Exchanger, Condenser, Steam Generator) returned
924 failure records, while the NPRDS word search on feedwater AND heater returned 2076
records. Obviously, many of the word search results involved other equipment (with only a
tangential mention of or connection to feedwater heaters). A review of the first 450 records (out
of the 2076 items) showed that only 157 of these 450 records (~35%) were related to the
component grouping of Heat Exchanger, Condenser, Steam Generator.
The EPIX search results showed a similar pattern: the detailed system/component search listed
38 failure records, while the word search on feedwater AND heater listed 276 records. Most
of these 276 failures did not involve feedwater heaters directly, but the feedwater heaters were
mentioned in the abstract as being affected by or included in the event. One purpose of the
quantitative review is to cull through all this information to present only the data specific to
feedwater heaters. It should be noted that searches of failure data for all Life Cycle Management
studies, no matter what system or component is being reviewed, must employ the same refining
process.
Searches of INPO records for LERs (Licensee Event Reports) show the same pattern, as do
searches of the NRC databases (such as an ADAMS search). With respect to the feedwater
heaters, the search of the INPO LER database (by system - feedwater & condensate, and by
component -heat exchanger) identified 5 LERs for a period covering 1984 to 2003, while the
NRC ADAMS search (a word search keyed to feedwater heater and covering 1999 to 2003)
identified 35 LERs. A search of the INPO SEE-IN records, looking specifically for LERs with
the keywords feedwater heater, identified 281 records from 1984 to 2002. Not all of these
items are actually LERs and not all of them directly relate to the feedwater heaters. So a more
detailed evaluation of the records is necessary to accurately identify items directly related to
feedwater heaters and their sub-components.
In addition, EPRI report 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11] contains a
summary of feedwater heater operating experience. The report states that there were 166 records
found in the NPRDS database for failure items involving feedwater heater shells and internal
components (from 1977 to 1996). The EPIX search described in the report lists 5 items (related
to tube leaks) that were identified (for 1997 to 2001). Although EPRI 1003470 does not
explicitly state it, this total of 171 failure-related items can be characterized as a generic industry
failure rate of 0.0632 feedwater heater failures per plant per year, assuming that there are 104
operating reactors in the US and using a 26-year period (171 divided by 104 divided by 26).
4-9
This value is a general estimate, but it provides a starting point, using applicable industry
information.
Also, EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] identified 29 items pertaining directly to feedwater heaters in the
INPO Plant Events database. The breakdown of these items is as follows:
17 events involved inspection and discovery of shell thinning (near the nozzle inlet area)
9 events involved tube leakage
2 events dealt with manways and gaskets
1 event dealt with partition plate repairs
These events are described in further detail in Section 5 of EPRI 1003470.

In the review conducted for the preparation of this LCM Sourcebook, the INPO Plant Events
database identified 209 records which were keyed on feedwater heater (for a period from 1991
to 2003). The detailed review reduced the number directly involving the feedwater heater
components to 47, most of which involved either tube leaks (17%) or shell thinning (38.3%).
Other items identified included impingement plate problems, tube plugs which broke away or
were not properly installed, and vent problems (corrosion). These 47 events represent a failure
rate of 0.0377 failures per plant per year, computed by dividing the number of events by the
number of operating reactors and dividing again by the number of years the database covers.
This value of 0.0377 is approximately half the value found from the NPRDS/EPIX data of EPRI
report 1003470, but it represents a search of a different INPO database.
With respect to NRC Generic Communications, an ADAMS search identified 18 Information
Notices tagged to feedwater heaters, 1 Information Bulletin tagged to feedwater heaters, and 3
Generic Letters tagged to feedwater heaters. In addition, 35 LERs were tagged to feedwater
heaters (covering 1999-2003).
The EPIX/NPRDS, Plant Events, SEE-IN, O&MR records, LERs, and NRC Generic
Communications items are evaluated in detail in the following sub-sections of this LCM
Sourcebook. These documents provide the industry operating experience for the LCM planning
evaluation of the feedwater heaters. They also provide the basis for establishing a generic
industry failure rate for feedwater heaters, to be discussed in Section 4.5.
In Section 4.2.3 and Tables 4-6 and 4-7, specific data for the FW heater components (tubes,
shell, etc.) are listed.
4-10

Table 4-2
Summary of Industry Database Search Results for FW Heaters (Operating Experience)
Source (Database)
Records Found
in Initial Search
Items Applicable to
FW Heaters
ADAMS LER Search
35
INPO System Search for LERs
INPO SEE-IN LER Search (word search)
281
23
INPO Plant Events (word search)
209
47
INPO NPRDS (word search)
2076
N/A
INPO NPRDS System/Component Search
924
850
INPO EPIX (word search)
276
27
INPO EPIX System/Component Search
38
20
INPO SER (word search)
32
INPO SEN (word search)
INPO O&MR (word search)
18
NRC Generic Communications IN
18
NRC Generic Communications GL
NRC Generic Communications IB
Note that the NPRDS items from the keyword search were not reviewed, due to the large amount
of compiled material. The total number is listed here for completeness. Those items found from
the system/component search were reviewed in detail. From the table above, it is clear that the
vast majority of items identified through database searches do not impact the feedwater heaters
and their mechanical components. Only the NPRDS review (for the system/component search)
accurately focused in on the FW heaters themselves. It should be noted that the NPRDS
system/component search was the most comprehensive and detailed search conducted, and it
provided the most useful results. EPIX (the successor to NPRDS) is based more on Maintenance
Rule (10CFR50.65) requirements than NPRDS, meaning that events (failures) in non-safety
systems were not listed as often as in NPRDS. In addition, EPIX items are typically not
identified unless there is a change in plant status (trip, power reduction, etc.). The NPRDS and
EPIX items are addressed in Section 4.2.3.
After a review of these items, those related to feedwater heater mechanical components are
included in the industry generic failure rate estimation. In order to execute successful LCM
planning on feedwater heaters, the items culled from the totals above need to be included as the
operating experience history. Plant-specific operating experience augments this data to estimate
failure rates used in LCM economic evaluations.
4-11
4.1.3 Maintenance Rule

Feedwater heaters are components that typically are assigned to (one of, or possibly all) three
different plant systems: Condensate (LP feedwater heaters), Feedwater (HP feedwater heaters),
or the Heaters & Drains system. Some plants may also include heater data in the Extraction
Steam system. Under the EPRI SYSMON (system monitoring) program outline [Ref. 38],
feedwater heaters are addressed in system 18: Extraction Steam / Feedwater Heaters & Drains.
The EPRI SYSMON data is found in Reference 38.
For Extraction Steam, Feedwater Heaters, and Drains, the SYSMON goal is no more than 3%
unplanned capacity loss or no more than three (3) unplanned capacity loss events with greater
than or equal to a 20% power reduction over a 24-month period, and also no common cause
unplanned scrams and no more than two (2) scrams over a 24-month period.
The reporting requirements include a Quarterly Report Card Update and a Maintenance Rule
performance update. The overall system monitoring and trending requirements for the
Extraction Steam / Feedwater Heaters and Drains system are shown in the System Monitoring
Plan for System 18 (part of the SYSMON database). The latest version of SYSMON has been
obtained from EPRI and the access screen for feedwater heaters is shown as follows:
Figure 4-1
SYSMON Access Screen System 18 Extraction Steam, Feedwater Heaters & Drains
4-12
The SYSMON flowchart in Figure 4-2 describes the process.
Figure 4-2
SYSMON Outline Plan
4-13
4.1.4 EPRI PM Basis Templates

EPRI TR-106857-V32 (Preventive Maintenance Basis, Volume 32 Heat Exchangers Tube
Type) [Ref. 19] was prepared in 1998 to provide the overall PM Basis project with input for shell
and tube heat exchangers. A large fraction of US nuclear plants are reducing PM costs and
improving equipment performance by more closely matching PM tasks with the functional
importance of their equipment. To succeed, utilities require information on the most appropriate
tasks and task intervals for the major types of equipment in their plants, accounting for the
influence of duty cycle and service conditions. Previously, this data did not exist in an accessible
form, often resulting in arbitrary and unsuitable tasks and leading to intervals which actually
increased maintenance costs and diminished reliability. The PM Basis Project was developed in
response to requests by EPRI nuclear members to provide a technical basis beyond vendor
information and to provide recommendations for assigning PM tasks to groups of plant
components. The Preventive Maintenance Basis project provides utilities with the technical
information necessary to build PM tasks and PM task intervals associated with over 40 specific
component groupings (such as valves, electric motors, pumps, HVAC equipment, etc.) beyond
the fundamental vendor information supplied with their products.
In order to make the PM Basis information more user-friendly, EPRI combined all the various
SSC PM templates into a single database PM Basis Version 4.0, with the Vulnerability
Analysis Module [Ref. 35]. The Preventive Maintenance Basis Database provides the nuclear
plant maintenance community with an essential reference for PM task selection and evaluation
for common major components. It provides the rationale for each task, the influence of
equipment failure locations, the failure mechanisms, the timing of failures, and information on
task content and task intervals.
Under the EPRI PM Basis Table, the feedwater heaters are evaluated as a separate category of
heat exchanger. They have their own boundary description, their own vulnerability evaluation,
and their own PM Basis Template. There are four separate tasks listed for feedwater heaters:
Performance Monitoring
NDE Inspection
Internal Inspection
Operator Rounds
Each task has its own frequency, depending upon criticality, duty cycle, and the severity of the
service conditions. In addition, cleaning and leak testing were also included as separate items
(see Table 4-3).
The template also contains a listing of potential failure locations for the feedwater heaters,
including degradation mechanism and influence (cause). There are 24 separate listings, which
cover the tube joint, the tubesheet, the tubes, the nozzles, the closure devices, and the internal
hardware (plates, supports, etc.). Each of the separate listings is coded for the four tasks detailed
above, in terms of importance.
4-14
The template defines the boundary of the feedwater heater as comprising all components from
nozzle to nozzle, including the shell and internal components, and excluding the control systems
and devices, the relief valves, and the insulation, along with the main steam reheaters (MSR).
The PM template helps to build and/or evaluate the maintenance performed on the feedwater
heaters at any given plant. It provides a quick overview to the system or maintenance engineer
of the minimum recommended maintenance for feedwater heaters. The overall PM Basis
template for tube-type heat exchangers is as follows, with the feedwater heater information
shown. Columns 1 through 8 refer to the different heat exchangers considered in the EPRI
program column 1 represents the high-pressure feedwater heaters and column 3 represents the
low-pressure feedwater heaters. Other heat exchangers addressed by the template include the
Service Water heat exchangers, the Safety Injection oil coolers, the Diesel Generator Jacket
Water heat exchangers and lube oil coolers, the RHR heat exchangers, and various plant area
coolers (including control room A/C).
Table 4-3
Feedwater Heater PM Basis Template
Equipment Description
Critical:
Duty Cycle:
PM Task
Service
Conditions:
Yes
1
(HP)
X
2
X
3
(LP)
X
Low
Severe
X
X
Mild
X
X
No
High
X
X
Performance
Monitoring
Task Interval
1M
1M
NDE Inspection
Task Interval
5Y
5Y
Internal
Inspection
Task Interval
5Y
5Y
Task Interval
2Y
AR
Task Interval
2Y
4Y
External
Inspections
(air-cool only)
Cleaning
Leak Testing
The indicated frequencies are 1 Month, 5 Years, 2 Years, 4 Years, and As Required.
4-15
EPRI TR-106857-V32 [Ref. 19] contains a discussion of each PM task, including information
about possible failure locations for consideration, the progression of the observed degradation,
fault discovery, and the tools and equipment needed for the task. The report also provides
definitions for the terms used in the template (critical, duty cycle, service conditions, etc.). There
is also a detailed discussion about degradation mechanisms for the various sub-components and
possible PM strategies for each item.
The PM strategy to address degradation is outlined in the following table, which lists failure
locations, degradation mechanisms, and the PM strategy for tube-type heat exchangers. Items
related to MIC and fouling are not addressed because they are not as applicable to FW heaters as
other heat exchangers.
Table 4-4
Failure Locations, Degradation Mechanisms, and PM Strategies
Failure
Location
Tubes
Degrad.
Mechanism
Erosion
(internal)
Degrad.
Influence
High flow velocity
Degrad.
Progression
Continuous
Failure
Timing
1
Random
Random
Random
Internal
Inspections
Continuous
Random
Cleaning
Continuous
Random
Continuous or
Random
Continuous
Random
Random
Continuous
Random
2
Random
Foreign Material
Suspended
Solids
Discovery /
Prevention
Eddy Current
Inspection
Cleaning
PM
Strategy
NDE
FAC
Non-uniform
scale deposits
Erosion
(external)
Fluid
impingement
Corrosion:
Foreign Material
Water Chemistry
and Fluid Quality
MIC
Galvanic
Chemical
Tube Materials
Defects
Eddy Current
NDE
Inspection
Perform.
Monitoring
Eddy Current
NDE
P, T
*(these are not
as applicable for
FW Heaters as
other HX)
Manufacturing
Installation
4-16
Random
Random
Random
Cleaning
Internal
Inspections
Inspection
Cleaning
NDE
Eddy Current

Failure
Location
Degrad.
Mechanism
Cracking
Degrad.
Influence
Vibration
Degrad.
Progression
Continuous or
Random
Failure
Timing
Random
Fatigue
Discovery /
Prevention
Eddy Current
PM
Strategy
NDE
Inspection
Perform.
Monitoring
Monitoring
Leak Test
Vibration
Inspection
Audible
Noise
Tube Joint
(welded)
Tube Joint
(rolled)
Defect
Defect
Galvanic
Attack
Internals:
Looseness
Baffles,
Supports,
Tie Rods,
Spacers,
Diffusers,
Impingem.
Plates
Tubesheet
Failed
Welds
Improper
Installation
Random
Leak Test
Pressure
Testing
Random
Abusive
Transient
Ultrasonic
Testing
Plugging
Chemistry
Monitoring
Pressure
Testing
Improper
Installation
Random
Random
Abusive
Transient
Ultrasonic
Testing
Plugging
Chemistry
Monitoring
Inspection
Continuous or
Random
Random
Materials
Water Hammer
Random
Random
Vibration
Continuous
Random
Water Chemistry
Audible
Noise
1
Thermal Stress
Continuous
Random
Impingement
(Tube Failure)
Random
Random
Corrosion
Water Chemistry
Random
Random
Cracking
Materials
Plugging
Random
Random
Leak Test
Leak Test
Internal
Inspections
Inspection
Video Insp.
Operator
Rounds
Cathodic
Protection
Internal
Inspections
Inspection
Leak Test
Pressure
Test
Internal
Inspection
Erosion
4-17

Failure
Location
Shell
Degrad.
Mechanism
FAC
Degrad.
Influence
Flow Rates
Inlet and
Outlet
Nozzles
Corrosion
Water Quality
Failure
Timing
3
Random
Discovery /
Prevention
Inspection
PM
Strategy
Internal
Inspections
UT Thick.
NDE
MIC
*(not as
applicable
for FWH)
Gasket and
O-ring leaks
Closure
Devices
Channel,
Partitions,
Manways,
Flanges
Notes:
1)
2)
3)
Degrad.
Progression
Continuous
Eddy Current
Improper
Installation
Random
Random
Materials
Random
Age
Continuous
(should be
failure free
for 7 yrs.)
Inspection
Thermal
Performance
Perform.
Monitoring
Operator
Rounds
Random on a scale of months to years

Random but can be very rapid (with sudden damage)
Random, but detectable within 2 or 3 years
This table should also be used with the consideration of various PM, PdM, and CM schemes
(discussed in Section 5).
4.2
Generic Communications and Other Reports
The NRC issues several hundred documents to the public each day. Many of these are specific
to one licensee, but some are intended for the entire industry (or a portion thereof). Generic
Communications are NRC-issued documents which address industry operating experience and
are transmitted to one or more class of licensee. The most typical types of generic
communications include Information Notices, Generic Letters, Information Bulletins, and
Regulatory Issue Summaries. This report details the review of Information Notices, Information
Bulletins, and Generic Letters with respect to feedwater heaters.
Information Notices are issued to provide significant recently identified information about safety,
safeguards, or environmental issues. They do not require a response. Information Bulletins
provide notice of recently identified issues in more detail, and typically they do require a
response. Generic Letters request that addressees: (1) perform analyses or submit descriptions
of proposed corrective actions regarding matters of safety, safeguards, or the environment and
submit in writing that they have complied with the requests with or without prior NRC approval
of the action; (2) submit technical information that the NRC needs to perform its regulatory
function; or (3) submit proposed changes to technical specifications. By a generic letter, the
NRC may also provide licensees with staff technical or policy positions not previously
transmitted or not broadly understood.
The NRC website provides two methods for searching Generic Communications a word search
of the Generic Communications or an ADAMS search.
4-18
As previously listed, a review of NRC generic communications indicated the following items
(with respect to feedwater heaters):
18 NRC Information Notices
4 NRC Generic Letters
1 NRC Information Bulletin
35 LERs identified in ADAMS (2000-2003)
4.2.1 NRC Communications

A review of the 35 LERs identified in the ADAMS word search (using feedwater heater and
keying on LERs), which covered a period from 1999 to 2003, indicated that none of these items
directly addressed feedwater heaters or their sub-components. Two of these items involved level
control issues and vent problems which were part of secondary-side transients, but these issues
are more properly assigned to the feedwater heater instrumentation and controls. In fact, of the
35 items, 10 were directly related to feedwater heater instrumentation and control problems,
usually hi-level problems. Three (3) of the items were related to condensate or condenser
problems, five (5) were related to feedwater pump or feedwater valve problems, two (2) were
related to recirculation M-G set problems, and two (2) were related to EHC problems. Four of
the items were duplicates (or revisions/corrections), making a total of 30 unique items for the
period.
A review of the 3 NRC Generic Letters (79-15, 88-20, 89-08) identified during the ADAMS
search reveals that none of these Generic Letters has any direct relationship with feedwater
heaters. GL 79-15 addresses operating problems and unresolved issues with steam generators in
PWRs, GL 88-20 addresses severe plant vulnerabilities and individual plant examinations, and
GL 89-08 addresses erosion/corrosion-induced pipe wall thinning (with mention of several
incidents involving feedwater piping).
Information Bulletin 88-07 described power oscillations at a BWR following a plant trip, and
added that one of the issues which could cause power oscillations was the loss of feedwater
heaters. But the feedwater heaters themselves were not mentioned in the event, so this Bulletin
does not directly apply.
The ADAMS search identified 18 Information Notices with some relationship to feedwater
heaters.
Also, a word search of the NRC Generic Communications revealed 5 additional Information
Notices. A review of these notices indicated that only one item (IN 99-019) was applicable to
feedwater heaters. This IN describes the FW heater shell rupture in May 1999 already addressed
in other documents.
4-19
4.2.2 INPO SEE-IN Communications

INPO SEE-IN (Significant Event Evaluation Information Network) documents consist of several
types of reports which communicate lessons learned from industry events. These types of
reports include SOERs (Significant Operating Experience Reports), SERs, (Significant Event
Reports), SENs (Significant Event Notifications), O&MRs (Operations and Maintenance
Reminders), and LERs (NRC Licensee Event Reports). These reports differ from plant
notifications (NPRDS/EPIX) and other plant event reports because they contain some level of
analysis of the problem, as opposed to just an identification and description.
The INPO LER search by system and component (looking under Feedwater, Condensate, and
Extraction Steam, and for Heat Exchanger) identified 5 LERs, covering a period from 1984 to
2003. One of these items (#331-03001) involved a reactor trip and water chemistry problems
caused by a condenser failure and did not relate directly to feedwater heaters. The remaining 4
items are as follows:
#461-95001 - Lack of Understanding of Feedwater Heater Train Operation During Removal

of FW Heater from Service Results in Decreasing Feedwater Temperature, Loss of Heater
Level Control, and Manual Scram
#313-89020 - Manual Actuation of Emergency Feedwater Pump Necessitated by Feedwater

Flow Diversion Through Feedwater Heater Tube Leaks and a Feedwater Recirculation Valve
#336-84012-1 - Manual Reactor Trip Necessitated by a Leak in the No. 5A Feedwater

Heater due to a Steady Rise in Level
#281-84010 - Reactor Trip 6A Feedwater Heater High Level
The INPO SEE-IN LER word search (keyed on feedwater heater) identified 281 items,
covering a period from 1984 to 2003. Of these 281 items, a review indicates that 23 were related
to feedwater heater mechanical components or subcomponents. These items are listed in the
following table.
4-20

Table 4-5
LER Evaluation (from INPO SEE-IN database)
Date
Plant
Type
Description
5/14/99
PWR
Steam leak from the rupture of the shellside of the feedwater heater
(combination of steam impingement & flow-accelerated corrosion).
6/18/95
PWR
A high differential temperature across the feedwater heater caused

tubesheet deflection (3 tubes popped out).
1/5/95
BWR
Low pressure feedwater heater string isolation to correct degradation

related to suspected tube leaks.
11/8/93
BWR
Plant had been shutdown to repair a tube leak on a feedwater heater.

Maintenance personnel had successfully completed the feedwater heater
repairs.
9/22/93
PWR
During the secondary plant response, the piping welds on the inlet of the
feedwater heater relief valves failed.
7/27/93
PWR
During the secondary plant response after the reactor trip, the tube side
relief valve for the feedwater heater ruptured and an upstream small bore
pipe failed at an elbow upstream of the valve.
3/1/93
PWR
Extraction line to the feedwater heater ruptured, causing a 3 by 6 inch hole

in the line (programmatic failure of the erosion/corrosion (E/C) program).
10/16/91
BWR
A feedwater heater string was out of service due to a heater leak.
9/12/91
PWR
Reactor at 93% for repair of tube leaks in the low pressure feedwater
heater.
12/15/90
BWR
Planned maintenance outage to repair low pressure feedwater heater tube

leaks.
11/21/90
PWR
One feedwater heater developed a gasket leak due to slight water hammer
resulting from the unit trip. The feedwater heater head bolts were
retorqued to eliminate the leakage.
4/10/90
BWR
Weld failure on the relief valve line on the north feedwater heater.
5/30/89
PWR
Feedwater flow diversion through feedwater heater tube leaks.
9/1/88
PWR
Design deficiency in the feedwater heater which caused it to become "airbound" (originally intended to have a continuous operating vent, but the
vent was never installed).
4/30/88
PWR
To reduce the production of sludge, all major copper components (e.g.,

feedwater heater (HX) tubes, etc.) in the secondary system have been
replaced with stainless steel components.
Sludge-lancing and crevice flushing were done to reduce the sludge and
remove to contaminants from the tubesheet crevice.
To reduce the caustic environment in the tube crevice and prevent tube
support plate denting, a secondary system boric acid addition program has
been implemented.
4-21
Date
Plant
Type
Description
2/4/87
PWR
High CF pressure resulted in damage to the feedwater heater relief valves.

An investigation revealed that a relief valve was leaking since it had a
broken weld at its base.
12/30/86
BWR
Failure of three main condenser tubes caused by 2A feedwater heater

stainless steel lagging which separated at the spot welds and fell on the
condenser tubes (believed to be the spot welds used to attach the lagging
to the feedwater heater, accelerated by the effects of steam flow from the
#1 bypass valve).
7/2/86
PWR
A cracked weld on the high pressure feedwater heater relief valve piping
that resulted from overpressurization.
4/24/86
BWR
Through-wall failure in the 6th stage feedwater heater extraction steam line
at the downstream reducer leading to the 6th stage feedwater heater. The
failure was caused by wet steam erosion.
5/31/85
PWR
The expansion joint for main feedwater heater cracked at a weld.
12/11/84
PWR
Low vacuum due to a leak in a moisture separator reheater cross-under

pipe manway gasket and 2 small leaks in elbows on feedwater heater vent
lines.
11/28/84
PWR
An orderly shutdown necessitated by a leak in the feedwater heater. All

feedwater heater tube leaks were plugged.
5/5/84
PWR
Feedwater heater was later determined to have leaking tubes which were
plugged.
4/18/84
PWR
Feedwater heater was inspected and found to have one (1) leaking tube
and thirty-one (31) leaking tube plugs.
Most of the remaining items dealt with feedwater heater controls and other secondary side
problems (pipe failures, turbine and condenser problems, etc.). The 23 items identified in the
LER database can be used to compute a failure rate. Using a base of 104 operating reactors for
the period from 1984 to 2003, and covering a period of 20 years, the failure rate would be 0.0111
failures per unit per year (23 divided by 104 divided by 20). This value is smaller than the other
values previously estimated from the NPRDS/EPIX databases (0.0632), and the INPO Plant
Events database (0.0377). This is not unexpected because LERs do not have to be submitted if a
failure impacts production, but does not affect plant safety. Many issues will not be categorized
as LERs. Therefore, the failure rate determined from review of LERs on FW heaters (0.0111) is
not useful for the purposes of this sourcebook, and will not influence the generic industry failure
rate determination (see Section 4.5 for further detail).
The search of SERs, SENs, and O&MRs identified the following items:
There were 7 items identified under SEN (significant event notification) via a word search for
feedwater heater. Of these, two addressed the same event: the feedwater heater shell rupture at
a PWR in May 1999. One of the items involved a steam line rupture, one involved a condenser
tube rupture, and on involved the rupture of a drain line from a moisture separator reheater. One
4-22
item involved isolation of extraction steam with an unrecognized loss of FW heating, and one
item involved a scram due to excessive power oscillations.
There were 32 items identified under SER (significant event report) via a word search for
feedwater heater. A review indicated that only 4 items are related to feedwater heaters, and
none of these involved specific feedwater heater mechanical component failures.
There were 18 items identified in the INPO O&MR database via a word search for feedwater
heater. Of these, only one item was related to feedwater heaters mechanical components,
O&MR 431, Secondary Plant Pressure Vessel Wall Thinning. This item involves the FW heater
shell rupture previously addressed during the LER and SEN review.
4.2.3
INPO NPRDS/EPIX Data
As previously described, there were four searches done of the INPO NPRDS/EPIX databases.
NPRDS was investigated using a word search (for feedwater AND heater) and using a
system/component search (focused on the condensate, feedwater, heater drains, and extraction
steam systems and on heat exchanger as the component), and EPIX was searched in the same
manner. The word searches yielded significantly more items than the system/component
searches, but this almost certainly reflects the occurrence of the words feedwater heater in the
text of items which do not directly involve feedwater heaters. The review and evaluation of
these items is addressed in this sub-section.
The numbers of items identified are listed in Table 4-2. The NPRDS items identified via a word
search on feedwater heater were not individually reviewed due to the amount. The NPRDS
items identified through a system/component search were individually reviewed (924 total
items). The EPIX responses were reviewed individually, for both the word search and the
system/component search, with 38 items listed for the system/component search and 276 items
for the word search.
The NPRDS data is tabulated in Tables 4-6 and 4-7. Note that the items are considered for the
years 1983 through 1996 the previous years were dropped because only 11 items were
identified (too few data points for 1976-1982). Note also that the data do not show how much
lost power generation was experienced, only whether the event caused a power reduction or a
plant shutdown (the records do not identify lost megawatt hours). The average number of plants
(95) was chosen based upon plant start-up dates.
Table 4-6
NPRDS Feedwater Heater Search Results - Summary
Total Items
HP / LP
Applicable
Items
Time Span
Avg. Number
of Plants
Failure Rate
924
292 / 632
839
14 years
95
0.631
These results are an order of magnitude greater than those found for the INPO Plant Events
database, the LER data, and the INPO EPIX database. This is not unexpected, because the
4-23
NPRDS failure criteria were different than the other databases, and included many failures the
others do not identify. These results are discussed further in Section 4.5, where the failure rates
for FW heaters are evaluated in more detail.
The following list details the NPRDS feedwater heater records by year.
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
19
44
62
51
64
90
105
101
79
72
74
30
59
35
Table 4-7
NPRDS Feedwater Heater Search Results Specific Components and Consequences
Tube Leak /
Tube Thinning
Manway /
Flange Leak
Shell Leak
505 (60.2%)
204 (24.3%)
33 (3.9%)
Nozzle
Leak
19 (2.3%)
Plug Leak
54 (6.4%)
FWH
Internals
Damage
49 (5.8%)
Power
Reduction
123 (14.7%)
Note that the total is greater than 100% because many items involved more than one finding.
Also, the items with power reductions are an estimate only because often the NPRDS field for
plant impact often conflicted with the text of the record. The percentage of failures involving
power reductions and shutdowns will be used in Section 4.5 in the determination of the generic
industry estimated failure rate. For the manway/flange leaks, the records were primarily for
worn, damaged, or misapplied gaskets, with a small percentage (about 10%) involving weld
cracks, seal leaks, or improper bolt tightness.
For the 38 EPIX system/component search items, 18 involved relief valves, vent valves, or
controls and are not included in the final total. The 20 EPIX items involve one shell failure
(already identified), four other cases of external leakage (shell leakage), one problem with a
manway flange, one problem with a divider plate, and 13 items involving tube leakage or
unavailability (due to surveillance test results). It should be noted that 7 of the 20 items were
submitted by the same multi-unit site, which supports the previous statement that not all utilities
report failures to the same degree or with the same frequency (for one site to submit more than
1/3 of the total is quite unusual, given that there are 104 operating plants of varying age in the
overall data field).
4-24
The EPIX results are presented in tabular form in Table 4-8, showing the impact on power
generation from the various failures.
Table 4-8
EPIX System/Component Search Results for Feedwater Heaters
Date
BWR/
PWR
Type
(LP / HP)
Description
LP FWH tube leakage attributed
to design limitations
Lost
Megawatt
Hours
3/24/97
PWR
LP
6/08/97
PWR
LP
6/24/97
PWR
LP
8/01/97
PWR
LP
10/26/97
PWR
LP
2/24/98
PWR
LP
10/06/98
BWR
HP
1/15/99
PWR
LP
2/08/99
PWR
LP
2/20/99
PWR
LP
4/02/99
PWR
LP
Tube Leak
29,285
5/14/99
PWR
LP
Shell Rupture
78,029
7/10/99
BWR
HP
Tube Leakage
14,552
7/15/99
PWR
LP
Tube Leakage
21,049
10/07/99
PWR
LP
Shell Thinning
None
12/06/00
PWR
HP
Socket weld leakage on shell
None
1/25/01
PWR
HP
Tube Leakage
4/30/01
BWR
LP
FAC found in steam inlet
None
5/01/01
BWR
LP
Damaged plugs found
None
4/11/03
BWR
LP
Tube Failures
Tube Leakage
Tube leakage due to inadequate
design of drain cooler endplate
15,433.2
11,345.3
23,215.6
13,970
10,896.6
None
19,927
17,028
4212
4363
12,341
72,243
Total MW-Hours Lost
347,889.7
Avg. MW-Hours Lost

(for 20 events)
17,394.5
A review of the 276 EPIX word search (on feedwater AND heater) results indicates the
following: 27 items which are directly related to the passive mechanical components of FW
heaters. The remainder of the items address controls or other secondary side equipment. If these
27 items are used to estimate a failure rate for FW heaters, then 27 is divided by 104 (assumed
4-25
number of operating reactors) divided by 6 years, which gives a result of 0.0433 FW heater
failures per unit per year.
A more detailed review of these 27 items shows that only 7 were not previously identified in the
EPIX system/component search. These 7 items are listed in tabular form below (note that the
word search items often did not specify whether a LP FWH or a HP FWH was involved, so that
tag is left out).
Table 4-9
EPIX Word Search Results for Feedwater Heaters (unique items)
Lost
Megawatt
Hours
Date
BWR/PWR
Description
7/20/97
PWR
Tube Leakage
43,392
10/16/98
PWR
Tube Leakage
4896
12/27/98
PWR
Missing Tube Plugs
1/18/99
BWR
Shell Thinning/Leakage
73,081
6/16/99
BWR
Tube Leakage
19,993
10/10/00
BWR
Tube Leakage
55,923
6/21/01
BWR
Shell/Weld Leakage
Total MW-Hours Lost
197,285
Avg. MW-Hours Lost
28,184
Of the 27 items listed in Tables 4-8 and 4-9, 19 (or 70%) are attributed to tube leakage, while 5
(or 18.5%) are attributed to shell thinning or shell damage. The remaining items involve plug
problems and inlet FAC.
4.2.4 Experience in Fossil Power Generation and Industrial Facilities
EPRI CS-1776 (Failure Cause Analysis Feedwater Heaters) [Ref. 18] was developed as part of
the EPRI Fossil Plant Performance and Reliability Program. Data from the Edison Electric
Institute (EEI) was used, along with data from a special survey conducted by EPRI and EEI to
gather information on feedwater heater problems. After the data was received and reviewed, a
study team visited several utilities to gather additional information and to clarify the data. In
addition, three major FWH vendors and a major A/E firm were visited to obtain their views on
feedwater heater failures. CS-1776 provides a summary of the survey results and also discusses
the problem areas for feedwater heaters. The most serious areas identified were the following:
Tube vibration
Drains subcooler flashing and level control
Tube plugging
4-26
Corrosion
Tube inlet erosion
Steam impingement
The report addressed each of these areas in a separate section. Channel head-to-shell leakage
was also identified as a serious problem, although it was found that other problems usually
caused this damage. Feedwater heater failures for unknown reasons comprised a large problem
area, reflecting the difficulty in diagnosing failures in a closed feedwater heater.
EPRI sponsored a feedwater heater survey in 1991 (EPRI GS-7417, Feedwater Heater Survey)
[Ref. 24] to ensure that the state of the art knowledge was collected, to extend current technical
knowledge and experience, and to meet the higher demands of future power plants. This survey
was part of the development project, Feedwater Heaters for Improved Coal-Fired Power
Plants. An initial step in the project was to review the problems associated with HP Feedwater
Heaters. A detailed questionnaire was prepared and distributed. The survey was distributed to
35 power plants in the USA and 16 power plants in Europe. The units were all fossil-fired. A
brief summary of the survey results are as follows:
Table 4-10
Damage Incidence for FW Heaters (Fossil) From Survey (EPRI 7417)
Defective Component
United States
Europe
Hxch Tubes
83%
25%
Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint
23%
12%
Tubesheet & Channel Head
23%
6%
Other Components
37%
6%
Replaced FW Heaters
8%
6%
Table 4-10 shows that 83% of US fossil plants (from the survey) have experienced tube
problems at some time or another.
EPRI has also issued a number of documents associated with improving the heat rate for fossil
power plants (some of this information would be applicable to nuclear plants as well). Those
reports include EPRI TR-109546 [Ref. 26]. In addition, there is a two-volume EPRI set
available on plant thermal performance, EPRI TR-107422 (Thermal Performance Engineers
Handbook) [Refs. 13 & 14].
4.3
Codes and Standards (Mandatory, Guidance, Associations, Societies)
The following codes and standards are applicable to feedwater heaters, and are regularly used in
the design, specification, operation, inspection, maintenance, repair, and modification of
feedwater heaters:
4-27
HEI (Heat Exchange Institute) Standards for Closed Feedwater Heaters, Sixth Edition, 1998
TEMA (Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association) Standards, 6th Edition, 1978
ASME Codes/Standards (Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Div. 1)
ASME Performance Test Code PTC 12.1 Closed Feedwater Heaters
Feedwater heaters are pressure vessels and their design and construction must meet the
requirements of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1, including
applicable addenda and case rulings. All feedwater heater units are to be stamped with the
ASME Code symbol. Both the HEI and TEMA standards reference the ASME Code (as they
describe code requirements for the heat exchanger equipment).
The HEI Standards for Closed Feedwater Heaters combines present industry standards, typical
purchaser requirements, and manufacturers experience to provide an overall view of design
criteria for closed feedwater heaters. The standards outline practical information on equipment
nomenclature, dimensions, testing, and performance. Use of the standards enables effective
communication between the purchaser and the manufacturer. The standards represent the
collective experience of the section members (manufacturers) and they provide a guide in the
preparation of feedwater heater specifications and selection. The standards are organized to
provide definition of technical terms, a discussion on feedwater heater performance, a listing of
mechanical design standards for sub-components (including code requirements), material design
standards, guidance on replacement specifications, a discussion of feedwater heater protection, a
discussion of typical installations, an overview of feedwater heater channel types, and an outline
of typical feedwater heater internals. Appendices address various issues such as feedwater heater
operation, maintenance, and the various zones within a feedwater heater.
The TEMA Standards are presented in three classes, for R, C, and B, each reflecting
acceptable designs for various service applications (power plant heat exchangers fall into the C
category). The standards are compiled by the Technical Committee of the Association. The
standards present information on the nomenclature for heat exchangers, data on fabrication
tolerances, general fabrication and performance information, a discussion on installation,
operation, and maintenance, mechanical standards for the three different classes described,
materials specifications, thermal standards, data on physical properties of fluids, general
technical information, and recommended good practices for heat exchangers. The standards also
address topics such as tube orientation, thermal expansion, heat exchangers supports,
impingement protection, and heat exchanger testing. TEMA is comprised of manufacturers of
various types of shell and tube heat exchanger equipment.
ASME PTC 12.1 provides procedures, direction, and guidance for determining the performance
of a closed feedwater heater with respect to the following:
1. Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD), which is the difference between the saturation
temperature (corresponding to the steam inlet pressure and the feedwater outlet temperature)
2. Drain Cooler Approach (DCA), which is the difference between the drain outlet temperature
and the feedwater inlet temperature
4-28
3. Tube side (feedwater) pressure loss through the heat exchanger

4. Shell side pressure loss
Note: FW heater performance monitoring is discussed in further detail in Sections 5.1.2 and
5.4 of this sourcebook.
This code applies to all horizontal and vertical heaters except those with partial pass drain
cooling zones (short-end drain coolers). Designs with partial pass drain cooling zones are
horizontal heaters with submerged drain cooling zones and vertical heaters with the channel-up
design. In those designs, only a portion of the feedwater passes through the drain cooling zones;
therefore, there are two feedwater flow streams with different temperature profiles. The heater
design is based on specific operating conditions that include flow, temperature, and pressure. It
is necessary to predict the heater performance by adjusting the design parameters for the test
conditions. PTC 12.1 presents methods of calculating the predicted heater performance. It is a
relatively new code, having been published in 2000.
Other organizations have codes and standards that apply to feedwater heaters to a more limited
degree, such as the following:
ANSI (American National Standards Institute) standards for dimensional requirements for
materials such as piping, tubing, flanges, etc.
AWS (American Welding Society) procedures for welding and post-weld heat treatment
that are not already covered by ASME or HEI
SSPS (Steel Structures Painting Council) standards for removal of mill scale, blasting,
surface preparation, and the application of coatings or paint
ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials) standards for the physical and
chemical properties of heat exchanger materials, fabrication tolerances, and materials testing
that is not addressed by ASME
ASNT (American Society of Non-Destructive Testing) standards to address the NDE

performed on the feedwater heaters (including testing and personnel qualifications)
In addition, there are requirements associated with pressure vessels and nuclear insurance which
must be part of the overall feedwater heater maintenance and engineering file at each power
plant. The system or component engineer is normally responsible for this area. Feedwater
heaters are addressed in the NEIL (Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited) Loss Control Standards
[Ref. 44] in two places: first, as part of the condensate/feedwater systems, where credit is given
under the boiler & machinery loss control program for high integrity tubing observation, testing,
inspection, and surveillance; and second, where partial credit is applied for original tubing that
has been replaced with non-copper bearing tubing (i.e., stainless steel).
4-29
4.4
Plant Performance Enhancement Program Technical Library
EPRI maintains a Plant Performance Enhancement Program (P2EP) technical library which
contains a variety of documents on feedwater heaters. The documents range from evaluations of
drain cooler problems at specific plants to overall descriptions of feedwater heater replacements
(at specific plants) to test program reviews and evaluations. These files are available to EPRI
members via the EPRI website or by contacting EPRI directly. EPRI TR-107422-V2 (Thermal
Performance Engineering Handbook, Volume 2) [Ref. 14] lists over 100 separate files applicable
to feedwater heaters.
4.5
Generic Industry Failure Rate Estimation Summary
The review of plant operating experience to determine a failure rate for FW heaters has shown
that the data have a wide disparity, and any estimation of a generic industry failure rate is highly
dependent upon how the data are evaluated and which sets are the most credible for the purposes
of LCM planning.
The following table summarizes the wide range of values determined from the operating
experience review. The number of failures are those found in the search that are directly related
to FW heater mechanical components, and the failure rate is the value determined by dividing the
number of events by the applicable number of operating nuclear units, and then dividing again by
the number of years (inclusive) that the database covers.
4-30

Table 4-11
Operating Experience Data for FW Heater Failure Rate Determination
Source
NPRDS/EPIX
data from
EPRI report
1003470
No.
Failures
171
Time
Span
1976
2002
Failure
Rate
Observations
0.0632
The failures are listed in EPRI 1003470 to show

failure types and affected FW heater components.
The failure rate was computed (in this sourcebook)
from the tabulations of 1003470. The data is
detailed, but the failure records were not
individually evaluated. These records are
representative of typical FW heater failures
0.0377
This data is taken from the INPO Plant Events

database, which contains industry event
summaries prepared by INPO as part of the INPO
event screening process. INPO does not
guarantee the accuracy of this data. This
information is considered typical of operating
experience data.
0.0111
This data considers only events which merit an

LER, and are not representative of FW heater
failures in the industry. The failure rate from the
data is too low for a true generic failure rate
because not enough events are included. This
value does not influence the determination of the
generic industry failure rate.
0.0433
The data from EPIX is limited because the

reporting standards do not include most
secondary-side plant equipment. EPIX is directed
toward the Maintenance Rule, which is focused on
safety. FW heaters are not safety-related and their
failures will not typically be reported in EPIX.
0.631
The NPRDS data is the most comprehensive and

detailed data for FW heater failures. All typical
failure modes are included, and the results allow
for the broadest estimation of failure rate.
However, NPRDS records also include many
failures found during outages that do not impact
plant operation, and also includes many minor
failures that were repaired without any plant
impact. NPRDS also includes older data when
nuclear plants were discovering the failure modes
for FW heater components. The NPRDS failure
rate is therefore too high to represent a generic
rate for the industry.
INPO Plant
Events
47
INPO LER
database
INPO EPIX
review
INPO NPRDS
review
23
20
839
1991
2003
1984
2003
1997
2003
1983
1996
4-31
The reasons for the broad range of failure rates have been explained in the specific sub-sections
that address the sources of the data. In order to determine or select a meaningful value for a
generic industry failure estimate for FW heaters, these differences need to be considered.
In view of the wide range of failure rates in Table 4-11, it is appropriate to estimate a range,
rather than a single value, for a generic industry failure rate. This allows for the consideration of
all the data sources, without ignoring or relying too heavily on any single one. In this manner,
all events are considered (to the appropriate degree) both the events that actually impact the
plants power production and the events discovered during surveillance but do not impact plant
operation. For this LCM sourcebook, the balance is struck by estimating a generic industry
failure rate of between 0.05 and 0.1 failures per unit per year.
The lower value of 0.05 is chosen as being representative of the EPRI 1003470 NPRDS/EPIX
data, the INPO Plant Events data reviewed for this sourcebook, and the EPIX data reviewed for
this sourcebook. The value chosen is higher than the individual failure rates found for the last
two sources because they do not include all failures impacting production. The upper value of
0.1 was chosen based on the percentage of NPRDS failures (about 15% from Table 4-7) that
involved power reductions (from Table 4-11, 0.631 times 0.15 equals 0.095),
This estimated failure range addresses the uncertainty involved in reviewing the disparate
industry failure data. The range allows for the differences in failure definition, differences in
failure reporting, and differences in how failures are categorized with respect to maintenance.
The range also accounts for differences in FW heater age and service, because older FW heaters
are expected to have a higher failure rate and will require additional surveillance and more
maintenance.
The experience information analyzed above is available only on a per-plant basis and not on a
per-heater basis. Because plant-specific LCM planning is normally done on a component basis,
the extent to which available information can provide an estimate of failure rate for an individual
FW heater is explored in the following paragraphs.
One way to estimate a per-heater failure rate is to simply divide a generic per-unit rate estimated
in this report by the plant-specific number of heaters. Although this would be an improved
generic estimate (because it would appropriately give higher or lower per-unit rates depending
on the number of plant-specific heaters), it would contain an element of inaccuracy because the
per-unit generic estimate does not account for the per-unit number of heaters on which the failure
count is based.
To improve the accuracy of the generic estimate for LCM planning purposes we need to know
the total population of heaters covered by the data sources. The average number of heaters per
unit would then be divided into the per-unit failure rates to give the average per-heater failure
rate.
A way to obtain the exact population of heaters and the average per-unit number of heaters is to
research documents such as Safety Analysis Reports for all plants. This activity was beyond the
scope of this project. It could, of course, be performed by any future plant-specific LCM
planner.
4-32
For our purposes, an estimate of the average number of heaters per unit was obtained by
interviewing several plant experts familiar with US plants. They came up with a range of perunit heaters of from 12 to 21, with the average of 16.5, assuming a uniform distribution of
values, which is only approximately true. (An estimate of the total is then 16.5 x 104 = 1716 FW
heaters in US plants). The average divided into the per-unit range of 0.05 to 0.1 leads to the perheater range of 0.003 to 0.006 failures per year. This would be the range of values to be used by
a FW heater LCM planner regardless of the number of heaters in his or her plant. Note that
these estimates still include the uncertainty caused by not knowing the exact number of FW
heaters in the population.
A point-value evaluation of the net present value of various alternative plant-specific LCM plans
would use a value between 0.003 to 0.006 as generic information to be combined with plantspecific failure data to give the value or values of failure rate to be used in the calculations with a
point-value LCM tool such as EPRIs LcmVALUE or LcmPLATO. This could be done using
either a single value (such as the average, 0.0045) or a higher/lower value within the range to
account for judgments of how well the industry average applies to the plant under evaluation.
For example, if the plant currently has a preventive maintenance program or a tube/shell material
type superior to the average plant, then a lower value in the range would be used to combine
with the plant-specific failure rate. Another approach might be to use the upper and lower values
of the range (i.e. a sensitivity study) and see if this changes the choice of the optimum LCM
alternative.
This studys finding that there is a significant range of industry experience-based failure rates (so
that forecasts of future failure rates would be even more uncertain) is the same finding as in most
of the nine other LCM sourcebooks produced to date. For this reason, the fidelity of LCM
planning efforts can be improved (over that provided by the point value approach) by going to
the next level of analytical technology and treating uncertainty explicitly using the probabilistic
approach embedded in decision analysis. In this approach, the single values used in
deterministic evaluations are replaced by probability density functions (PDFs) as inputs. It has
been shown (e.g., in the LCM uncertainty analysis performed for the South Texas main generator
[Ref. 46]) that failure rates are among the most important drivers of LCM decisions. As a first
order approximation to a FW heater PDF, one might use a uniform distribution between 0.003
and 0.006 failures per year (perhaps adjusted to account for plant-specific data). An improved
distribution could be obtained by conventional methods for combining statistical data with expert
judgment (for a FW heater, the judgment would be elicited from a few experts such as the plant
FW heater component engineer, a secondary-side system engineer, a manufacturer technical
representative, or an expert consultant). EPRI is exploring various existing tools for performing
plant-level LCM with uncertainty and will use the findings to guide future work in this area [Ref.
47].
4-33
5
GUIDANCE FOR PLANT-SPECIFIC SSC CONDITION &
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
This section addresses Steps 8, 10, and 11A in the LCM planning flowchart (Figure 2-2) and
provides guidance for the plant-specific LCM planning for feedwater heaters. Also included in
this section is a compilation and description of available and useful condition or performance
monitoring programs, along with a brief overview of the most common repair techniques used in
the industry for feedwater heaters. This information is useful for LCM planning when
maintenance strategies are being evaluated and alternative LCM plans are being developed.
Individual plants may also discover that their program can be enhanced by including some of
these techniques (if they are not currently utilized).
In Step 8, the plant-specific operating and performance history is compiled, as discussed in

Section 5.1 below.
Step 10 comprises a compilation and review of the plant-specific maintenance program for
feedwater heaters (see Section 5.2) leading to the establishment of a complete inventory of
the current maintenance tasks and providing a basis for determining if enhancements or
changes are desirable (or necessary).
In Step 11A, the intent is to characterize the present plant-specific physical condition and
performance of the feedwater heaters and the implementation of effective preventive
maintenance procedures, diagnostics, and component condition monitoring. The assessment
of the maintenance tasks should pay close attention to whether and how the tasks address any
deviations identified in the SSC performance assessment and SSC condition review. The
deviations may be positive in that plant-specific SSC performance and conditions are
superior to the industry average, which may indicate that unnecessary or too frequent PM is
being performed, or the deviations may be negative, which indicate a need or opportunity for
improvement. Details of the condition and performance assessment are discussed in Section
5.3.
5.1
Compiling Feedwater Heater Operating and Performance History
The operating/performance history and the age of the FW heaters at any given plant have a major
bearing on the LCM planning evaluation and the choices made for the future, and they provide
the basis for the condition and performance assessment. In conjunction with the performance
review, a thorough assessment of the existing equipment is of paramount importance in making
realistic decisions with respect to the feasibility of maintenance options and strategies. To make
the optimal decisions, the history must be known and correctly evaluated. The following are the
recommended steps in assembling the operating and performance history for the FW heaters:
5-1
Guidance for Plant-Specific SSC Condition & Performance Assessment
Assembling the maintenance history for the FW heaters, particularly for the past 10-15 years.
This includes maintenance on the shell (if any), the tubes, the tubesheets, the tube supports,
the baffles and shield plates, the drains and vents, and the inlet/outlet nozzles. The
maintenance history includes preventive maintenance, predictive maintenance, corrective
maintenance, and a listing of work orders.
Trending the historic failure rates to identify the specific components that exhibit unusual
performance challenges (either design or operational problems). This will primarily involve
the tubes and the baffle and shield plates.
Compiling and reviewing performance test results, surveillance test results, etc., to determine
if trends exist in the FW heaters. This includes a review of available data on thermal
performance.
Reviewing the Maintenance Rule performance parameters and trends, the system &
component health reports, the monitoring status, the goals, and the discussions of specific
failures, along with the effectiveness of corrective action.
Reviewing the plant trip and power reduction history to determine and list the events caused
by the FW heaters and sub-components. For those events, the lost power generation, the
extended outages, the power reductions, the corrective actions, etc. provide the input into the
historical cost of FW heater failure. These results provide a basis for projecting future
performance in the LCM planning. The results will be negative if the performance is
declining and additional corrective action is not implemented and positive if new PM or PdM
tools are applied, or if equipment replacement is begun.
Review of design changes and technology upgrades (in maintenance or operation) that have
been instituted.
Review of the availability of spare parts and maintenance equipment.
Review of any component replacement work.
Review to establish the feasibility of obtaining major component replacement in the most
efficient manner possible (particularly for older equipment).
The following sections/paragraphs detail specific areas for review and provide specific guidance
on industry methodology to determine the current condition of the feedwater heaters. Also
included is a review of current repair techniques for feedwater heater components.
5.1.1 Feedwater Heater Condition Reviews (Work Orders, Failures Trends, Lost
Power Generation, Trips, Preventive Repairs, Replacements, Refurbishments)
To develop a clear picture of past feedwater heater performance from which projections can be
made, a thorough review of the maintenance history is needed. The maintenance history is
captured at most plants in Work Orders, usually located within a database (most plants typically
have electronic records from the mid-1980s to the present). Work Orders are written to
implement preventive, predictive, and corrective maintenance and also to implement other
activities, such as surveillance tests, overhauls, inspections, design changes, and replacements.
5-2
With respect to feedwater heater LCM, the most important Work Orders are those which
implement corrective actions as a result of problems or failures (including work from design
changes due to problems or enhancements). These Work Orders often contain information
concerning the root cause, whether repetitive problems were involved, the cost and man-hours
spent in the corrective action, and the reason why the problem was not detected in an early stage.
This information is used to identify additional preventive maintenance (PM) or predictive
maintenance (PdM) activities, potential enhancements to the current maintenance program,
and/or the need for upgrades, replacement, or new design. The basic premise is that performance
can only be improved by preventing problems (the ability to detect degradation and failure
before loss of function occurs) and by determining the actions which could prevent future
problems.
The Work Order review also provides detailed information as to the annual frequency of
occurrence of problems and failures presently experienced by the feedwater heaters. The
problem occurrence rate is one of the most important inputs for calculating the costs of
corrective maintenance and failure (due to lost power production, new equipment, regulatory
risk, EPIX reporting, MR monitoring, etc.) when performing economic modeling of LCM
alternatives.
The Work Order review can also be used to trend the annual corrective and preventive
maintenance activities over the past several years to determine if the rate of problem occurrence
is increasing or decreasing, and if the ratio of corrective to preventive Work Orders (and their
implementation costs) are changing. An effective PM program should show a gradual decrease
in corrective Work Orders and associated costs. This data can lead to the identification of
additional corrective and/or preventive actions that may be justified to improve the feedwater
heater programs. These actions would then be part of the alternative LCM plans for the
feedwater heaters (to be evaluated on a plant-by-plant basis).
In the Work Order review, consideration must be given to the impact of FW heater maintenance
on plant reliability, with respect to the different types of heaters involved (high-pressure or lowpressure), with respect to plant lost power generation (if an entire heater string is taken out of
service), and any overall maintenance strategy for doing work on-line versus off-line.
5.1.2 Review of Diagnostic Tests and Monitoring Devices/Data
There are a number of applicable EPRI reports that address feedwater heater testing and
performance monitoring. They are briefly described (with applicable information) in the
following paragraphs.
EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11] provides an overview of
general maintenance activities, preventive maintenance tasks, non-destructive examination
testing, and destructive testing and analysis (see Section 6 of the reference for details). The
report also addresses performance monitoring (and inspections). Performance monitoring looks
at the overall integral performance of the feedwater heater. Performance deterioration that is
detectable is likely to be caused by vibration, corrosion, erosion, scaling or other deposits, or
control system problems (addressed in EPRI 1007425) [Ref. 6].
5-3
Performance monitoring is also addressed in EPRI GS-6935 (Feedwater Heaters Maintenance

and Repair Technology: Reducing Outage Cost) [Ref. 17]. This report provides an overview of
some newer surveillance and inspection techniques for feedwater heaters (such as sonic pulse
testing). The report also details the advantages of on-line acoustical monitoring to identify tube
leaks and shell cracks.
For an efficient outline of general heat exchanger issues, EPRI TR-106471 (Heat Exchangers:
An Overview of Maintenance and Operations) [Ref. 15] is useful. The report does not
specifically focus on feedwater heaters or nuclear plants, but it does provide helpful information
on heat exchanger performance, heat exchanger components, non-destructive testing, and general
information on repairs.
EPRI NP-4057, Volumes 1-3 (Nuclear Plant Feedwater Handbook), particularly Volume 3 [Ref.
23], outlines routine heater performance analysis by focusing on the critical parameters to be
measured regularly. The points listed are:
Shell-side pressure
Shell-side steam saturated temperature
Feedwater temperature at the inlet and outled nozzles
Drain temperature exiting the shell
Feedwater flow
As previously detailed in Section 4.3, this data can be used to determine the uncorrected terminal
temperature difference (TTD) and the drains cooling approach (DCA) for comparison with
design values. Note that there is a difference between the uncorrected TTD (which is the
saturated temperature for the actual shell-side steam pressure minus the actual feedwater outlet
temperature) and the corrected TTD (developed in PTC 12.1), which is the saturated temperature
for design steam pressure minus the feedwater outlet temperature corrected to design conditions.
The TTD is essentially a measure of the heat transfer capability of the feedwater heater. The
higher the TTD above the design value, the poorer the performance of the heater. The actual
measurements can only be compared with the values obtained during performance testing to
determine if significant changes are taking place. If for the same conditions, the TTD is
substantially higher, then the feedwater heater has problems. In general, a TTD that is
significantly higher than design (even if conditions are not identical) is cause for concern. A
tabular representation of FW heater performance monitoring is shown in Table 5-1.
NP-4057 points to ASME PTC 12.1 [Ref. 39] for detailed, comprehensive, and accurate
performance testing.
The DCA (drains cooling approach) is the difference between the drains outlet temperature and
the feedwater inlet temperature. A DCA that is significantly higher than the design value is
cause for concern. For proper analysis of the data, it is desirable to know the water level within
the shell and to know how it was determined (and where the instrument taps are).
5-4
EPRI GS-6935 (Feedwater Heaters Maintenance and Repair Technology: Reducing Outage
Cost) [Ref. 17] contains a detailed outline of maintenance tasks, on-line monitoring, maintenance
accessibility, inspection and testing, corrective maintenance and repairs, and post-maintenance /
pre-operational testing. This reference also addresses recording maintenance data, and has a
section devoted to heater venting maintenance. The purposes of the report are:
To report to utilities on the state-of-the-art feedwater heater maintenance and repair

technology
To develop feedwater heater procurement specifications and guidelines based upon the best
sample specifications and experience available
To develop additional recommendations for EPRI and the Utility Advisory Group for future
projects to improve the maintenance of feedwater heaters
The report was written based on material collected from numerous sources, principally an
industry literature search (conducted from 1982 1988), which reviewed technical reports,
articles, symposia, and other data specifically related to feedwater heater maintenance. Also
included in the source review were the study teams own records and experience, a utility
maintenance and engineering records search (related to feedwater heaters), interviews with
power plant personnel, expert interviews, and comments from EPRI and the Utility Advisory
Group. The report strongly concluded that feedwater heater maintenance plans must be
effectively established and implemented in order to obtain the optimum performance. The report
challenged utilities to apply strong forward-looking programs to maintain the feedwater heaters
in their plants. The details of such maintenance (and performance monitoring) are presented in
the following paragraphs.
The report highlighted the following on-line monitoring techniques:
Acoustic Monitoring (for tube leaks, crack detection, etc.)
On-Line Level Monitoring (normal liquid level annunciation)
On-Line Thermal Performance Monitoring (TTD, DCA)
The report highlighted the following inspection and test techniques (for easily accessible areas):
Visual Inspection external (vents and drains)
Visual Inspection - internal (channel interior surface, pass partition plate, tubesheet face,
tube-to-tubesheet joints, and tube interiors)
Fiber Optic Inspections (using various instruments)
Inaccessible areas of the feedwater heater (such as the shell interior) should be performed with
boroscopes, fiberscopes, and video boroscopes. Erosion on the shell and/or baffle/impact plates
and tube damage should be considered and investigated when conducting these types of
inspections.
Acoustic leak detection is most valuable when monitored on-line. Early leak detection is based
on the fact that even the smallest leak creates discrete noises from the turbulence of the leak jet.
The sensors are piezoelectric pressure transducers installed near the feedwater inlets and
5-5
mounted so that the water-borne noise is acoustically coupled to the transducers. EPRI has
sponsored a number of programs to demonstrate the various configurations of test equipment,
and several plants (nuclear and fossil) have identified tube leaks, baffle erosion, and shell cracks
well before scheduled outages and before the damage became severe enough to impact plant
operation [Ref.17].
The leak testing of tubes can be accomplished from either the tube or the shell side using several
different testing methods. All leaking tube and/or tube-to-tubesheet joints should be identified
both on the tubesheet (with an oil-based marking pen) and on a tubesheet layout drawing.
The most widely used methods for leak detection from the shell-side are as follows:
Pressurized Air
Water
Vacuum
Halogen Gas
Though less frequently utilized for general leak testing, the following tube-side techniques are
effective:
Pressurized Air
Vacuum
Hydrotest
Sonic Pulse
As with leak testing, the determination of the tube leak location within the tube span may be
accomplished from either the shell side or the tube side via several different methods, such as
vacuum testing, pressurized air, water, and sonic pulse testing. In some cases, the orientation of
the feedwater heater will feature a specific type of test. Individual tube hydrotesting has also
been useful in examining tubes that have presented indications of problems through other
observation (i.e., eddy current testing). An individual hydrotest will show tubes that are near
failure. An individual hydrotest can be used to verify eddy current results, although tubes may
be damaged by the test. In that case, the tube will need to be stabilized with rods (and plugged).
Sonic pulse testing involves the transmission of an audible sound wave down the inside of an
empty tube under inspection. Echoes from this sound wave are returned from any anomalies in
the tubes inner wall and the echo characteristics provide information about the locations and
types of the anomalies. This method detects anomalies on the inner tube wall.
Electromagnetic testing (ET) is the technique used most often to examine feedwater heater tubes.
It can be performed rapidly with a high confidence in the test results, and the data is repeatable
(and can be stored and retrieved easily). Selection of the appropriate ET technique is dictated by
the magnetic properties of the tubing material. For non-magnetic alloys (304 SS), eddy current
testing (ECT) is widely used. For shell thickness determination and verification, pulsed eddy
current testing is used (and is described later in this section).
5-6
The most commonly used NDE technique for determining the condition of feedwater heater
tubes is eddy current testing (ECT). Eddy current testing is extremely fast, repeatable, good for
baseline screening, and accurate in sizing known defects. However, ECT is very operatordependent. Quantification of certain types of defects is sometimes difficult, and other NDE
methods must be used in conjunction with ECT to obtain optimum results. Eddy current testing
is described in detail in EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11].
Eddy current testing utilizes an internal probe specifically designed for the tube diameter and
material being tested. The probe consists of an alternating current coil which establishes an
electric field that produces a field of eddy currents in the tube. This field is interrupted by tube
wall flaws such as wall thinning, cracking, and pitting, and these interruptions cause an
impedance change in the coil. This impedance change is reflected as a Lissajous signal and is
measured in terms of signal magnitude and/or signal phase. In-place tube bundles are inspected
from the tube inside diameter by pulling the test probe through the tube at a constant speed.
Tubing can be inspected at rates greater than 1 foot per second. During this process, the data can
be saved to a magnetic disk for review by a qualified analyst. The defect type, size, depth, and
wall thickness can be determined by comparison to a known calibration standard.
Figure 5-1 shows a flowchart rendition of the eddy current process.
5-7
Figure 5-1
Eddy Current Flowchart (from EPRI 1003470)
5-8
The tubes are scanned through the absolute and/or differential test modes to achieve full
volumetric inspection along the entire tube length. This is accomplished by fully inserting the
probe and pulling the probe back along the tube length at specified test speeds.
The inspection objective is to detect and analyze all potential tube flaws. Eddy current testing
offers the following advantages:
It is relatively fast (high digital sample rates allow for test speeds up to 260 in. per sec.
It has a good sensitivity to material property changes.
It has a good sensitivity to surface cracks.
The test equipment is portable and state of the art.
The test equipment is easily configured and applied for automatic examinations.
Data storage and retrieval are easy.
Multi-frequency, multi-channel equipment allows for efficient monitoring.
Eddy current limitations include the following:
Eddy currents are influenced by the presence of material flaws and material property
variations such as conductivity, permeability, geometry, etc.
Eddy currents are influenced by flaw orientations that make the testing direction-dependent.
Eddy current testing is mainly used for testing thin materials (i.e., tubes).
The sensitivity level for flaw detection is not uniform throughout the test piece. Optimum
detection occurs at the test surface closest to the test coil and decreases exponentially below
the surface.
Good eddy current signal interpretation requires a high level of operator training and
awareness.
Because conventional eddy current testing cannot be performed on magnetic tubing material,
several alternative eddy current schemes need to be considered:
Full-Saturation ET: This procedure uses a magnetic saturation technique which renders
ferromagnetic tubing non-magnetic. This technique is applicable for tubes made of 439
stainless steel, Seacure, Monel, and Al29-4C with a wall thickness of up to 0.035 inches
(0.9mm).
Partial-Saturation ET: This technique uses an ET probe with equipped with permanent
magnets to partially saturate the tube wall. This technique is applicable to carbon steel tubes
and thick-walled ferritic stainless steel tube materials.
Remote-Field ET: This technique provides a volumetric inspection of ferromagnetic tubing

without magnetically saturating the tube wall. This technique is applicable to all
ferromagnetic tubing, including carbon steel, Monel, and ferritic stainless steel.
Flux Leakage: A pair of induction coils are used to detect tube flaws, one for inside and
outside diameter flaws, and one for just inside diameter flaws. By positioning on
5-9
differentially connected induction coil between the magnetic poles, differences in flux
leakage along the wall are monitored. Changes in the total flux caused by gradual wall
thinning are easily noted.
The most important considerations in planning ECT examinations are to prepare a
comprehensive tube sampling scheme to adequately assess the current feedwater heater
conditions, to perform the necessary corrective measures, including tube pulls, to mitigate any
existing problems, and to calculate the remaining life once the test results are complete. In order
to have a successful ECT examination, the following tasks should be considered:
Gather FW heater design drawings, records of past operation, maintenance/repair records,

chemistry data, and previous ECT examination reports
Establish a tube sampling scheme consistent with an existing numbering system
Establish a tube plugging criteria
Prepare for repair and remedial measures (i.e., tube cleaning) if necessary
EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] contains a detailed section that addresses each of these items and
provides data on tube plugging criteria. Please refer to Section 6.3.4 for further detail on ECT.
EPRI GS-6935 also contains detailed information on eddy current testing [Ref. 17].
EPRI 1003470 also contains a discussion of pulsed eddy current testing, which is used to
evaluate the thickness of FW heater shells. Pulsed eddy current testing senses the presence of
defects by inducing eddy currents in the insulation jacket and outside surface of the shell. The
change in the magnetic field is monitored as the currents diffuse and permeate the shell and the
wall of the insulation jacket. The shell thickness is measured by recording the time it takes for
the currents to diffuse and permeate.
Pulsed eddy current testing has been increasingly used in FW heater applications because of the
following features:
The methodology measures wall thickness through the insulation, eliminating the cost of
insulation removal
The probe can penetrate a carbon steel shell up to several inches thick
The probe requires no direct contact with the shell and can be applied on-line
The testing is not affected by the geometry of the shell, any coatings, or the type of insulation
The probe is tolerant of misalignment and motion
The probe is not sensitive to the users skill (unlike tube testing)
The technique focuses on a relatively large area which limits its application (or usefulness) to the
identification of widespread corrosion/erosion. But this is the case with flow-accelerated
corrosion (FAC). The limitations of pulsed eddy current testing include the need to assess a
broad area of the shell, possible underestimation of wall loss, the possibility that localized
damage could be overlooked, the need to re-calibrate the equipment at various locations around
the shell, and the difficult working conditions (when used on-line) due to heat and noise.
5-10
The results of pulsed eddy current testing indicate that the technology will show damage after
wall loss exceeds about 20%.
5.2
Review of Current Maintenance Plans
Once the plant-specific maintenance history has been compiled, the current maintenance
activities need to be identified. When using the word maintenance in LCM planning, it must be
noted that this includes preventive, predictive, and corrective actions, whether required by
regulations (testing, inspection, surveillance, monitoring, sampling, EQ, etc.), or by applicable
codes/standards (IEEE, NFPA, ASME, etc.) or by insurance requirements, or by state/local
government requirements, or by plant procedures, programs, or policies. Collecting the
associated activity parameters (frequency, affected components, labor hours, material costs, etc.)
will provide key input to developing a base case for LCM planning. This base case will not only
create an inventory of the current activities but will provide a benchmark for comparison to
industry practice and a basis from which the need for additional activity, enhancements, or even
task reductions can be considered. One way to assemble this information is shown in Table 7-1,
where the LCM alternatives can be compared. Further detail will be included in plant-specific
LCM tables because actual estimated costs can be developed, based upon known factors (labor
rates and material costs) and supported by yearly budgets, estimates, and future projections.
Section 3.3 of EPRI 1003058 (Life Cycle Management Planning Sourcebooks Overview
Report) [Ref. 1] provides guidance on collecting plant-specific information about the current
maintenance plan, both in terms of technical scope and economics. The guidance for system
engineer interviews and the data detailed in Table 3-7 (Listing of Typical Plant Programs) and
Table 3-8 (Inventory of SSC Maintenance Tasks and Parameters) will be particularly helpful in
the review. Section 3.8 of EPRI 1003058 details the collection of data for economic evaluations,
which is the fulcrum of any plant-specific LCM plan. Often, the most difficult data to quantify
are the costs associated with various plant maintenance activities.
5.3
Current Condition and Performance Assessment
The generic performance data and information presented in the preceding sections can be used
for plant-specific LCM planning in several ways. In particular, for plants without a large basis of
experience, the generic data provides a basis for a sound component-specific PM program. The
data may also be used for comparison trending or performance projection when attempting longterm LCM planning. The data may also be used to evaluate future degradation and/or failure
estimations. The steps involved in plant-specific performance and condition assessment
(including benchmarking) can be summarized as follows:
At the system level, benchmark the feedwater heater contribution to the total plant lost power
generation against the BWR/PWR specific average (Table 4-1). This will provide a
preliminary assessment as to the current and past plant system and component health and will
indicate if the plant feedwater heaters perform at, above, or below the present industry
standards with respect to lost power generation (and any associated impact to plant safety).
The results of this benchmarking provide a basis for projecting future trends (negative or
positive) in the LCM planning for the feedwater heaters. This step also allows for the
5-11
establishment of a plant-specific failure rate (which may be used in future LCM planning
documents).
At the component level (for an individual feedwater heater and its sub-components), a review
should be conducted of all the plant transients, power reductions, and reactor scrams since
plant operation began. This review should focus on the cause of the event, the principal
systems or components involved, and whether the feedwater heaters were a direct or indirect
contributor to the event. In many transients, the feedwater heaters are affected even if they
are not involved in the root cause, and their response to the event should be noted and
understood.
At the component level, compare the plant-specific failure rates with those discussed in
Section 4.1 of this sourcebook. If this is not possible, review in detail the previous 10 years
of feedwater heater corrective action work orders to develop the plant-specific failure history.
Compare the EPRI SYSMON data for feedwater heaters (discussed in Section 4.1.3 of this
sourcebook) with the plant-specific parameters established under the Maintenance Rule to
verify that the plant parameters are reasonable and representative and appropriate for the
feedwater heaters. The SYSMON goal is no more than 3% unplanned capacity loss or no
more than three (3) unplanned capacity loss events with greater than or equal to a 20% power
reduction over a 24-month period, and also no common cause unplanned scrams and no more
than two (2) scrams over a 24-month period [Ref. 38].
Compare plant-specific feedwater heater maintenance tasks against the industry

recommendations, shown in Table 4-3 of this sourcebook, in the tables found in Section 4.3
of EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11], and also in Tables 6-3 and 6-4 of EPRI 1003470 to identify
opportunities for addition or deletion of PM or PdM activities and any adjustments to task
intervals.
Evaluate any design-related deficiencies (such as shield plate geometry problems leading to
erosion) causing plant-specific issues with the feedwater heaters.
Compare plant-specific failures (i.e., their causes) to the generic failures and causes
discussed in Section 4 to identify problems not yet experienced at the plant.
Evaluate plant-specific maintenance practices with respect to industry experience and

standards to identify opportunities for enhancements.
EPRI has issued a number of technical reports that address feedwater heater assessment. These
reports provide guidance in performing maintenance, and also in evaluating component
conditions. For example, EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) outlines
feedwater heater performance, troubleshooting, failure modes, condition-based maintenance,
repairs, and replacements. EPRI NP-7552 (Heat Exchanger Performance Monitoring
Guidelines) provides discussions of heat exchanger selection criteria, a description of the effects
of fouling, a description of performance monitoring methods, and an analysis of the results of
heat exchanger performance monitoring. EPRI NP-4057 (Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater
Handbook) provides 3 volumes which address feedwater heater design & operation, feedwater
heater specifications, and feedwater heater maintenance. EPRI TR-106741 (Heat Exchangers:
An Overview of Maintenance and Operations) provides an overview of heat exchanger
performance, monitoring, and repair. Finally, EPRI GS-6913 (Feedwater Heaters: Replacement
5-12
Specification Guidelines) provides improved guidance for the development of specifications for
the procurement of replacement feedwater heaters.
5.4
Condition Monitoring Technologies, Tests, and Diagnostics
Condition monitoring for individual components and performance monitoring for the FW heaters
as a whole are critical processes to maintain heater reliability at the highest levels. Performance
monitoring will include an overview of the FW heaters as a whole and also is part of the plants
thermal performance monitoring program.
5.4.1 System Condition Monitoring
System condition monitoring consists of observing the system parameters and trends during
operation and comparing this to typical operation to determine if any degradation of performance
is occurring. Levels, pressures, and temperatures are monitored continuously for the feedwater
heaters and alarms are experienced during process excursions. In digital control systems,
operating parameters can be trended using statistical process control techniques and system
performance can be predicted. In older analog systems, external recording devices are used to
record the system parameter values (responses) and to develop baselines for comparing
performance trends. These methods can be used to predict future performance and system
degradation, allowing corrective maintenance to be performed prior to critical situations.
The FW heaters play an important role in the overall thermal performance of the plant. The
methods mentioned earlier (in Sections 4.3 and 5.1.2) for FW heater performance monitoring
include the TTD (terminal temperature difference) and the DCA (drain cooler approach). Also
of importance is the TR (temperature rise) across the FW heater. To reiterate, the terms are
defined as follows:
The TTD of a FW heater is the difference between the temperature of the extraction steam
o
and the temperature of the FW outlet. The design TTD for most plants varies from 5 F to
o
8 F. A high TTD indicates that the FW heater thermal performance is deficient.
The DCA of a FW heater is the difference between the temperature of the subcooled
condensate leaving the heater and the temperature of the feedwater entering the heater. It can
be a direct measure of the heat transfer capability of the heater. For most plants, the design
o
DCA is typically about 15 F.
Also, the TR across the FW heater (the difference between the feedwater inlet and outlet
temperatures) gives an indication of how well the heater is operating.
The data can be assembled in tabular form to provide the FW heater response to changes in these
parameters. Compared to the design values for the FW heater, increases in TTD, decreases in
TR, and changes in DCA are indications of one or more problems.
5-13

Table 5-1
Feedwater Heater Responses (to plant changes) from EPRI TR-107422-V1
Typical Responses to Plant Power Changes
Power Change
TTD
DCA
Power Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Power Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Typical Responses to FW Heater Problems

Problem
TTD
DCA
Inadequate Venting
Decrease
Increase
Decrease
Level Increase
Decrease
Increase
Decrease
Level Decrease
Increase
Decrease
Increase
Tube Fouling
Decrease
Increase
Increase
Tube Leak
Decrease
Increase
Decrease
High FW Flow
Decrease
Increase
Increase
Plugged Tubes
Decrease
Increase
Increase
Trending of these variables allows for the development of a historical health report for each
FW heater, and is an important part of a successful preventive maintenance program. EPRI has
developed a model to assist with evaluation of overall thermal performance, the Nuclear Thermal
Performance Advisor (NTPA). The NTPA is a PC-based program based on expert system
technology and on the EPRI Thermal Performance Diagnostic Manual. The NTPA is an
interactive heat rate diagnostic system that includes nine plant diagnostic areas:
Condenser
High-Pressure FW Heaters
High-Pressure Turbine
Low-Pressure FW Heaters
Low-Pressure Turbine
Main Steam System
Moisture Separator Reheaters
Nuclear Steam Supply System
Turbine Control Valves
5-14
5.2.4 Component Condition Monitoring

Individual components within a system may also be monitored using predictive technology. For
the feedwater heaters, a survey of applicable component condition monitoring techniques was
performed, and the following programs/activities were determined to be of potential use. For
detailed information, review EPRI 1003470 (Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide) [Ref. 11],
EPRI TR-106741 (Heat Exchangers: An Overview of Maintenance and Operations) [Ref. 15],
EPRI NP-7552 (Heat Exchanger Performance Monitoring Guidelines) [Ref. 16], and EPRI GS6935 (Feedwater Heaters Maintenance and Repair Technology) [Ref. 17].
Much of this information has already been addressed earlier in this Section (in 5.1.2), where
specific methods of condition monitoring are detailed. The following paragraphs outline the
process in a broader fashion.
The first step in the evaluation of condition monitoring data is to have a template (or structure)
which makes the information available for proper interpretation. This involves the outline of
troubleshooting methodology in response to problems or changes in the FW heaters. The
following table presents a template for troubleshooting FW heater problems.
Table 5-2
Troubleshooting Feedwater Heater Problems (from EPRI 1003470)
Problem Experienced
Temperature rise of FW
gradually decreases
Pressure drop across FW heater
gradually increases
Temperature rise of FW is less
than specified
Temperature in shell-side
condensate is less than specified
Area of Investigation
Possible Solutions
Fouled heat transfer surfaces.
Check the water chemistry.
Deposits of scale or corrosion on

the interior surfaces of the tubes.
Clean the tubes.
Air-binding non-condensable
gases are accumulating in the
steam space of the FW heater.
The gland seals at the lowpressure end of the turbine may
be operating incorrectly.
Avoid contamination.
Check the vents.
Check the gland seals.
For heaters operating at vacuum,
check all joints.
Vent lines are cool

Temperature rise of FW is less
than specified
FW flow is bypassing.
Check pass partition welds.
A possible leak at the partition

plate allows water to bypass the
tubes.
Ruptured tube or a leak between
the FW side and the steam
space of the heater.
Check diaphragms and gaskets.
Pressure drop across the heater

decreases
Shell floods with condensate with
outlet control valve fully open
Condensate level is unstable

Level is erratic and surges
Water Hammer
Vibration
Control devices are not working

properly or the back-pressure in
the drain line is too high.
The FW heater is overloaded, the
temperatures are too high, or the
flow rates are causing pulsations
in system piping.
Check for erosion.

Shut down FW heater to avoid
water backing into extraction
steam lines.
Repair any leaks.
Repair the control devices.
Reduce back-pressure.
Check all parameters (flow rates,
pressure, temperature) against
design specifications.
5-15
Once a problem has been identified and checked, then the cause(s) need to be determined. This
involves a review and a comparison of the specific problem event to known failure modes, which
would include the previously identified aging mechanisms (and effects).
A summary of FW heater problems and a flowchart of possible causes are listed in the following
figure.
Figure 5-2
Summary of FW Heater Problems and Possible Causes (from EPRI 1003470)
5-16
EPRI NP-7552 [Ref. 16] provides a detailed summary of heat exchanger performance
monitoring methods.
5.5
Water Chemistry and Corrosion
EPRI NP-4057 [Ref. 23] contains a discussion on water chemistry for feedwater heaters. The
discussion references EPRI CS-3184 (Corrosion-Related Failure in Feedwater Heaters) [Ref.
25] for additional technical information.
In conventional nuclear plants, the fluid under consideration is demineralized water in various
o
o
phases from liquid to slightly superheated steam with a temperature range of 100 F to 550 F
o
o
(38 C to 288 C). The pressure range is from almost full vacuum to 2000 psig (13,993 kPa).
Some of the impurities present in feedwater are calcium and magnesium salts, totally dissolved
and suspended solids, as well as corrosion products and contaminants. Silica, aluminum, iron,
and copper deposits are commonly found, as we as residuals of oxygen, hydrazine, ammonia,
and hydroxide. For BWRs, ammonia, hydrazine, and hydroxide are not likely to be present, but
oxygen levels are likely to be substantially higher than in PWRs, and free hydrogen is also
present. There are two basic treatments used to control feedwater chemistry. PWRs now use allvolatile treatement while BWRs rely upon high purity, demineralized water.
The water chemistry factors which influence feedwater heater tube corrosion are steam
contaminants (e.g., chloride ions, halide salts, and dissolved oxygen). Other critical factors are
fluid temperature and pH achieved by adjustment with ammonia. Systems with all-steel and
stainless steel components generally run with a pH between 9.2 and 9.8 to minimize carbon steel
corrosion, thereby limiting the entrainment of corrosion products in the condensate. Problems
are encountered with mixed metal systems containing both copper and carbon steel alloys.
These systems are generally run at a pH of between 8.8 and 9.2 which is not optimum for the
control of corrosion in either material, but represents a useful compromise.
Oxygen contributes to uniform corrosion, stress corrosion cracking, intergranular corrosion
(particularly exfoliation), and inlet-end erosion in PWR units. Steam surface condensers reduce
oxygen levels to 7 ppb or less, but steam surface condensers are only designed to maintain this
oxygen removal at full load and with minimal air in-leakage. High concentrations of oxygen can
occur at low loads and during outages. Temperature levels are critical to various tube materials
because of their inherent material properties.
There are many problems and inadequacies with the metals used in feedwater heaters and none
of the materials is totally immune to corrosion. The nature and aggressiveness of the
environment determines the degree and type of corrosion. All of the following major categories
of corrosion have been experienced in feedwater heater systems:
Uniform corrosion (general attack) copper alloys
Crevice corrosion
Pitting
Intergranular corrosion
5-17
Selective leaching or parting (copper alloys)
Erosion-corrosion
Stress corrosion (copper alloys)
It is important to recognize that the water chemistry can vary considerably throughout the
feedwater system. Variations in pH from 7.2 to 10.4 have been noted. For this reason, the whole
system should be monitored as necessary to protect the feedwater heaters.
For further information, a much more complete evaluation of water chemistry issues is found in
EPRI TR-102134-R5 (PWR Secondary Water Chemistry Guidelines) [Ref. 12].
Also, as previously mentioned, additional detail about corrosion problems in feedwater heaters
may be found in EPRI CS-3184 (Corrosion-Related Failures in Feedwater Heaters) [Ref. 25].
This report evaluates feedwater heater corrosion problems on a materials basis, with separate
sections for carbon steel, admiralty brass, copper-nickel alloys, Monel alloy 400, type 304
stainless steel, and titanium. There is also a detailed discussion of water chemistry in power
plants. In developing LCM plans for feedwater heaters, it is recommended that the system or
component engineer be familiar with the specific plant specifications with respect to secondaryside water chemistry. A past history of corrosion problems in the feedwater heaters (and in the
secondary-side piping, valves, etc.) may indicate a weakness in the plant chemistry program.
5.6
Feedwater Heater Repairs (Corrective Maintenance)
Making timely and appropriate repairs to feedwater heaters is very important because
components cannot always be replaced (and should not be) when problems are first identified.
Part of a successful surveillance and maintenance program is the implementation of proper
repairs to damaged or degraded equipment. Feedwater heaters operate in stressful environments
and will show evidence of this stress as the plant ages, even if all the sub-components function
properly. EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] contains a section that addresses feedwater heater repair
(Section 7). The items addressed include the following:
Tube Leak Detection Methods
Tube Repairs
Tube-to-Tubesheet Repairs
Diaphragm, Pass Partition, Channels, and Covers
Miscellaneous Repairs
Spare Parts
Each of these items (and also shell repair) is briefly discussed in the following paragraphs. For
detailed information, refer to EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11], and also EPRI TR-106741 [Ref. 15],
which addresses general heat exchanger repair.
5-18
5.6.1 Tube Leak Detection Methods

To detect feedwater heater leaks, plant operators commonly monitor heater water levels, the
terminal temperature differences between the water and the steam, and stem positions on level
control valves. However, given the volume of water passing through the feedwater heaters, leaks
must be quite large before becoming observable in this fashion. Leaks of this magnitude will
affect plant efficiency and can damage adjacent tubes. Once a tube leak is detected, determining
which heater in a train is leaking can be difficult. The right heater must be identified so that it
may be taken off-line with a minimal impact to the plant as a whole.
Tube leak detection is discussed in detail in Section 5.1.2, with the common methods listed.
The following methods may be used to detect tube leaks:
Detailed Operations Indications
Acoustic Leak Detection (on-line and off-line)
Shell/Tube Pressurization (off-line)
Eddy Current Testing off-line (see Section 5.1.2 for detail)
The use of detailed operational indications involves marking the stem positions of the normal
drain valve during each shift. This method can be enhanced by developing a valve flow vs. stem
position calibration curve. Indications of leakage in the feedwater heater can also be found from
an increased water level in the heater (which should be checked frequently), an increasing
terminal temperature difference (TTD), the actuation of a high-level alarm, the opening of the
high-level dump valve to the condenser, a discrepancy between the condensate and feedwater
flow indicators, an increasing air demand signal for the air-operated control valves, and an
excessive pressure drop across the integral drains cooler.
Acoustic leak detection is possible because when a leak develops in a pressurized heater tube, the
turbulence associated with the water escaping from the leak generates pressure disturbances in
the surrounding medium (i.e., the shell). These disturbances (or sound waves) are propagated
through the shell-side medium and may be detected by the use of accelerometers or piezoelectric
equipment (or by pressure transducers). Both low-frequency (2-20 kHz) and high-frequency
(20-175 kHz) detection monitoring is used, with the high-frequency equipment being more
effective and reliable. Manufacturers have developed dual-frequency sensors because the lowfrequency data is also helpful.
Shell pressurization is widely used in leak detection, and is discussed in detail in Section 5.1.2.
Identifying the exact location of a tube leak within the tube can be difficult; however, the
location is important in determining the probable cause of the failure. In U-tube feedwater
heaters, the following details should be determined and documented: the pass in which the
failure occurred, the distance from the failure location to the tubesheet, and the overall length of
the failure (if possible).
5-19
5.6.2 Tube Repair

Tube repair includes several options: tube plugging, tube sleeving, tube pulling, and plug
removal.
Time constraints influence how a leaking tube is repaired. For example, a tube may be plugged
with a temporary tube plug and some adjacent tubes may also be plugged (a practice known as
insurance plugging, although this is performed less currently than in previous years)) and then
at the next planned outage, the temporary plugs can be removed and the actual condition can be
determined with eddy current testing. Only the defective tubes would then be plugged with a
permanent plug. Plug designs may be categorized as follows:
Hammer-in taper-type plug
Elastomeric plug
Mechanical-type plug
Welded-type plug
The hammer-in taper plugs are relatively easy to install, are inexpensive, and can be removed
with a pipe wrench or by drilling them out. The plug material must be compatible with the tube
to be plugged and should be softer than the tube material. The design allows for only limited
contact between the plug and the tube wall. Hammer-in plugs are typically limited to use on LP
FW heaters.
Mechanical seal plugs typically contain jaw segments and an O-ring which allow for greater
sealing capability. The plugs are driven into the tube with a driving nut and an Allen wrench.
They can be installed fairly easily and give reliable performance in both LP and HP applications.
They are more expensive than hammer-type plugs.
Welded plugs can be either seal-welded in the tube or explosively expanded into the tube. Seal
welding involves a mechanical plug (tapered or hollow) that is inserted into the tube like the
hammer-in method and is then welded to the tubesheet for a permanent seal. Seal welding is
difficult at times due to the heater orientation and because the surfaces need to be very clean to
build a good weld. Explosive welding involves the insertion of a thimble plug (with a small
detonator) into the tube. The plug then explodes against the tube, forming a seal across the entire
length of the plug. Explosive welding has matured as a plugging technique, so that safe and
reliable bonds can now be made without damage to the tubesheet ligaments. Explosive plugging
offers greater integrity and better long-term reliability than other techniques, it is relatively easy
to perform (even in awkward orientations), it can be less expensive than regular seal welding,
and minimum preparation is needed. Its limitations include the need for licensed personnel to
perform the work and the permanency of the plugs (they are typically pure nickel and are
difficult to drill out).
Each plugging technique has its limitations and special considerations for where it might be
used. If permanent repairs cannot be decided upon and made in a timely fashion, it is better to
use a high integrity temporary plug instead.
5-20
Complete detail on the various tube plug schemes, along with an outline for making the decisions
and proper planning necessary to successfully plug tubes, may be found in EPRI 1003470,
Section 7 [Ref. 11]. In addition to plugging, the section also discusses tube stabilizing (to
prevent any future damage to adjacent tubes. The section also addresses tube failure reporting
and the maintenance of tube plugging records. EPRI GS-6935, Section 9 [Ref. 17] also
addresses tube plugging in detail, with an emphasis on excellent procedural control and a good
description of the plugging techniques and their selection criteria.
As a part of license renewal programs (and refurbishments), some utilities are reviewing their
maintenance histories and considering feedwater heater restoration by decreasing the number of
tubes that have been plugged. For example, non-defective tubes that were plugged for insurance
purposes can be examined and then returned to service if undamaged. Also, some leaks at the
tube-to-tubesheet joint can be sleeved and the tube returned to service. Comprehensive testing
(i.e., a hydrotest) is needed to verify that restoration is a viable option, with a post-maintenance
test to certify the work.
5.6.3 Tube Sleeving
Tube sleeves can be used to cover damaged inlet tube ends and to seal a tube leak at almost any
point along the tube. Often, permanent repairs can be made without losing the use of the tube.
Tube sleeving involves the following considerations:
Tube sleeving can be the optimum repair for inlet end erosion
Tube sleeving can restore a leaking tube to operation
Tube sleeving can strengthen tubes at the supports (where vibration and thinning occur)
Tube sleeving requires detailed advance planning for the vendor and the tools needed
Tube sleeving requires skilled installation
Sleeves can be installed by mechanical expansion, explosive welding techniques, or hydraulic

expansion. For tube defects located near the tube end, a roller-expanded method may be used.
Complete detail on tube sleeving is available in EPRI 1003470, Section 7 [Ref. 11]. This report
also contains a few detailed examples of repairs made at nuclear plants.
5.6.4 Tubesheet and Tubesheet Joints
When the pressure on one side of the tubesheet is considerably higher than the pressure on the
other side, leaks will occur in the smallest leak paths. The consequent erosion, which resembles
the holes bored by worms, is sometimes called wormholing (or wire-drawing). Wormholing can
occur in the following locations: tube-to-tubesheet welds, the tube and tube hole surfaces, and
the ligaments between the tube holes and the tubesheet. If the tubes are more resistant to
abrasion than the tubesheet, the ligaments can be severely damaged, even to the point of
rendering the tubesheet unsafe.
When an inspection discloses the washing away of the tube-to-tubesheet welds of if there has
been leakage from the high-pressure side to the low-pressure side through the joint, then it is
5-21
probable that there is wire-drawing damage to the ligament. This possibility is one reason for the
full-depth expansion of tubes into the tubesheet holes.
Eroded tube-to-tubesheet welds should always be examined to determine if cracks or any
porosity has been exposed. The metal surface should be removed to the bottom of the crack or
the porosity, and then the space can be repaired via welding.
If the wormholing has progressed into the ligaments, then the damaged areas need to be ground
out. Most of tube should be removed from the tubesheet (leaving enough to anchor the tube in
place). Weld metal is then applied to the tubesheet until the original thickness is restored.
In the course of performing eddy current or visual examinations of feedwater heaters, it is
sometimes necessary to pull a tube from a tube bundle for further examination. EPRI 1003470
provides a description of how tubes are pulled from heaters.
There are two types of tube-to-tubesheet joints used for feedwater heaters: expanded-only, and
welded and expanded. Expanded-only tube joints are used for low-pressure feedwater heaters.
An alloy weld overlay is generally not required for an expanded-only joint. High pressure
feedwater heaters generally use a welded and expanded tube joint with an overlay on the face of
the tubesheet to match the tubing material. Again, EPRI 1003470 presents a detailed overview
of tube-to-tubesheet joint repairs (in Section 7.3). Repairs to the diaphragm, the pass partition,
the channel covers, and other gasketed covers are detailed in Section 7.4 of EPRI 1003470
(Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide).
5.6.5 Shell Repairs
Shell repairs are made as the result of erosion or cracking or other problems discovered through
non-destructive examination of the FW heater shell (or through visual inspection). Typical
repairs include weld build-ups of wasted areas, repairs on major shell welds, and welding repairs
made to expansion joints (if applicable). Weld repairs are also made for problems identified on
nozzles, manways, and other shell connections (vents, etc.). Cracks in the shell (at the tubesheet
joint, for example) may be ground out prior to welding repairs.
Shell repairs are addressed in detail in EPRI 1003286 (Repair Technology for Degraded
Pressure Vessels and Heat Exchanger Shells: Repair and Replacement Applications Center
Task 91) [Ref. 45]. This report assists plant personnel in making informed repair or replacement
decisions that take into account the continued operation of the vessel, the consequences of
possible outage time and loss of production, and the satisfaction of all applicable ASME Boiler
& Pressure Vessel Code requirements.
Heads, channels, and gasket joints need to be replaced in the same orientation in which they were
removed. The gasket should be aligned just as it was prior to removal and the manufacturers
directions need to be followed with respect to bolting torque, torque pattern, and the number of
torque passes. The head (or flange) ought to seat the gasket, not crush it. A large amount of
gasket material protruding from the edge of a flange joint indicates over-tightening. Lubricant
must be applied to bolts prior to tightening. The bolts are then tightened at the specified torque
and in a staggered pattern consistent with the manufacturers direction, with the proper number
5-22
of passes being used. EPRI TR-106741 [Ref. 15] addresses shell repairs and issues related to
flanges and other shell features.
5.6.6 FW Heater Cleaning
Cleaning is a corrective maintenance activity that is employed after significant degradation has
been observed. It is not a preventive maintenance activity for FW heaters. Cleaning will not
extend the life of the tubes directly, but will remove deposits from the internal surface. Cleaning
should involve the following tasks: an evaluation of the type of degradation that has occurred, a
determination of the appropriate cleaning method (providing the best results and limiting any
potential damage to the heater), and a consideration of chemical cleaning as an option.
Industry literature (see EPRI GS-6935, Appendix A) [Ref. 17] indicates that mechanical cleaning
of heat exchanger tubes does not appreciably cause thinning of the tube wall.
5.6.7 Spare Parts
The recommended spare parts for feedwater heaters are listed below.
Table 5-3
Recommended Spart Parts for FW Heaters (from EPRI 1003470)
Parts
Tube Plugs
Quantity
Comments
2% - 3% of tubes depending
upon heater condition
Includes welding supplies if

welded plugs are used
10% of total bolts
Includes both a bolt and a nut
Two sets
Includes gaskets for pass

partition covers.
One set
Includes special welding

supplies, if necessary
One set of roll expansion tools

for each tube diameter and
gauge
Drivers and spare rolls optional
Bolting:
Manway cover, Channel cover,

Pass Partition cover
Gaskets
Diaphragm
Tube Expanders
Accessories (gauge glass,

control valve, temp. and press.
instrumentation)
------
As recommended by the
manufacturer
The decision to replace a feedwater heater (or to re-tube or rebundle the heater) is explored in
Section 8 of EPRI 1003470. A materials list is also presented that details material specifications
and plant environment. It is noted that, in general, feedwater heaters are designed with
approximately 5% excess heat transfer surface area. Historically, a feedwater heater is
5-23
approaching a replacement or major overhaul decision point when 10% of the tubes are plugged
[Ref. 23]. Decisions for run/repair/replacement and remaining life assessment are detailed in
Section 8 of EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11]. The run/repair/replacement decision is also addressed in
Sections 7 and 8 of this LCM Sourcebook.
5.7
Heater Access
It is normal practice in the industry to obtain detailed design instructions from the manufacturer
for the disassembly and reassembly of each heater. As detailed in EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11], the
typical information provided includes the following:
Torque values and tightening pattern sequence, type of gasket material, gasket surface
preparation, and the alignment of mating components for bolted designs
Special care needed in removal and re-installation instructions for welded diaphragm
configurations
Special welding requirements for torus ring closures
Handling instructions for the various manway covers
Most heaters a U-tube configurations and have both tube ends in the same channel separated by a
partition plate. Many older heaters, particularly high-pressure hemi-head designs, provide
inadequate clearances for maintenance in the channel area. In addition, some partitions were
fully welded, which requires cutting and re-welding to gain access to both passes. Overall, the
industry has moved away from such designs. Utilities should consider how much working
clearances and accessibility impact the maintenance and testing for their feedwater heaters.
Modifications which improve access and working clearances should be considered in
conjunction with LCM planning, and accessibility should definitely be factored into any heater
replacement decisions in the future. One possibility to consider is the installation of neck flange
and bolted cover arrangements, to allow full access with easily removable manways.
An additional recommendation (from EPRI NP-4057-V3 [Ref. 23]) is to substitute flanged fullaccess covers for the elliptical heads.
5-24
6
GENERIC AGING AND OBSOLESCENCE
ASSESSMENT
This section addresses steps numbered 11B and 11C in the LCM planning flowchart (see Figure
2-1b). The intent is to help characterize the aging of passive SSCs, the wear-out of active
components, and the obsolescence of SSCs. This discussion will serve both to help address the
need for and the timing of any replacement of FW heaters in the LCM planning process, and to
identify potential environmental or service conditions that affect the rate of degradation or that
may require special plant-specific attention. It is noted that obsolescence is not considered for
FW heaters because obsolescence is normally related to electronic components, instruments,
analog equipment, and piece parts that are no longer commercially available. However, the
aging mechanisms and effects for the FW heaters are tabulated and evaluated (but obsolescence
is not listed). FW heaters and obsolescence are addressed in Section 6.3.
6.1
Aging Effects and Mechanisms Review (Aging Matrix)
Table 6-1 presents a brief overview of the aging mechanisms and effects (and the common plant
programs for aging management) for FW heaters and their various materials. This table is not
comprehensive, because it does not mention plant-specific programs or frequencies, but it is
detailed enough to begin to develop an understanding of aging management for FW heaters. A
plant-specific LCM plan will contain the details of each plant program.
In terms of license renewal, FW heaters are usually excluded from the LR scope and are
therefore not typically listed in aging management matrices (for various heat exchangers).
However, an aging matrix for a FW heater will be similar to an aging matrix for other plant heat
exchangers that are included in license renewal. Table 6-1 follows the format and information
given in GALL report (NUREG-1801) [Ref. 29] for heat exchangers.
6-1
6-2
Tubes
Tubes
Component / Part
Stainless Steel
(high alloy)
Material
(typical)
Carbon Steel
(low-alloy)
Chemistry Control Program,

Preventive Maintenance,
Functional Testing,
Surveillance Testing
Performance Testing
(same as above)
Performance Testing
Plant/Heater Specific
Functional Testing,
Surveillance Testing,
Performance Testing
(same as above)
Performance Testing
Loss of Material
Loss of Material
Fouling
Cumulative Damage
Cumulative Damage
Loss of Material
Loss of Material
Fouling
Cracking
Cumulative Damage
General Corrosion
Galvanic Corrosion
Crevice / Pitting Corrosion
MIC
Erosion & Erosion/Corrosion
(FAC)
Wear
Particulates, Precipitation
Flow-Induced Vibration
Mechanical / Thermal Fatigue
MIC
(FAC)
Wear
Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC)
Typical Aging
Management Program
Cumulative Damage
Aging Effect(s)
Aging Mechanism(s)
Table 6-1
FW Heater Summary Aging Mechanisms & Effects
Generic Aging and Obsolescence Assessment
Tubesheet
Tubes
Component / Part
Carbon Steel
(low alloy)
Material
(typical)
Copper Alloys
Functional Testing,
Performance Testing
(same as above)
Hardness Test
Functional Testing,
Performance Testing
(same as above)
Loss of Material
Loss of Material
Fouling
Cracking
Change in Material
Properties
Cumulative Damage
Cumulative Damage
Loss of Material
Loss of Material
Fouling
Cracking
Galvanic Corrosion
MIC
(FAC)
Wear
Selective Leaching
General Corrosion
Galvanic Corrosion
MIC
(FAC) and Wormholing
Wear
Typical Aging
Management Program
Cumulative Damage
Aging Effect(s)
Aging Mechanism(s)
6-3
Carbon Steel
Channel Head &

Divider Plate
6-4
Carbon Steel
(low alloy)
Material
(typical)
Stainless Steel
(high alloy)
Shell/Nozzles/Internals
Tubesheet
Component / Part
Loss of Material

Functional Testing,
Performance Testing
Loss of Material
General Corrosion
Galvanic Corrosion
MIC
(FAC)
General Corrosion
Galvanic Corrosion
(FAC)
Cracking
Cumulative Damage

Cumulative Damage
Fouling
(same as above)
Loss of Material
Wear

Functional Testing,
Performance Testing
Visual Inspections and

Structural Monitoring (on
the external surfaces)

Functional Testing,
Performance Testing
Loss of Material
General Corrosion
MIC
(FAC) and Wormholing
Typical Aging
Management Program
Cumulative Damage
Aging Effect(s)
Aging Mechanism(s)

General Notes:
1) Mechanical / Thermal Fatigue is dependent on the number of cycles (> 7000 is of concern) at
o
o
system temperature > 220 F (carbon steel) and > 270 F (stainless steel)
2) Galvanic corrosion is significant when materials used are not close together on the galvanic chart
(in the presence of an electrolyte and where sacrificial anodes are not used) typically not of
concern for FW heaters
3) Crevice/Pitting corrosion may exist in stagnant or low flow areas where bulk fluid contaminants
may concentrate
4) MIC (microbiologically-induced corrosion) can attack any material but is significant for treated
water only if a biocide is not used (not an issue for FW heaters, which use boiler-quality water),
although layup conditions should be monitored
5) Wear may occur at interface joints due to some relative motion from flow-induced vibration and/or
thermal expansion
6) Particulates, precipitation, and MIC are plausible if the supply originates at the bottom of a tank or
reservoir and no biocide is used (does not apply for FW heaters)
o
7) The threshold temperature for stress-corrosion cracking in stainless steel is 140 F in the presence
o
of bulk fluid halides or sulfates and 200 F in the presence of O2
8) Copper alloys that have less than 15% zinc or 8% aluminum (aluminum bronze) are susceptible
to crevice/pitting corrosion as well as selective leaching (if not inhibited, such as admiralty brass
containing >1% tin)
Table 6-1 is typical for aging mechanism evaluation performed for license renewal. Table 4-4,
while similar, is more directed towards degradation and failure.
An aging mechanism review is at the heart of LCM maintenance planning. There are five (5)
documents pertinent to such a review for feedwater heaters: The Aging Management Guideline
for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants Heat Exchangers (SAND93-7070) [Ref. 7], Standard
Review Plan for the Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants
(NUREG-1800) [Ref. 28], The Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) report (NUREG-1801)
[Ref. 29], Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Guidance Document NEI 95-10 [Ref. 42], and EPRI
1003056 (Non-Class 1 Mechanical Implementation Guideline and Mechanical Tools, Revision 3)
[Ref. 43]. This last reference was developed to provide guidance on implementing the
requirements of license renewal for applicable mechanical SSCs.
With respect to License Renewal, feedwater heaters are passive but they do not require aging
management evaluation because they are typically scoped out of consideration. Heat exchangers
that are within the scope of license renewal are evaluated for their pressure boundaries in the
tubes and shells. The aging mechanisms and effects for these heat exchangers are monitored and
controlled by existing plant programs, as detailed in the License Renewal Application and the
technical aging management review document.
The NEI guidance document can be used as a starting point in the aging management review of
the feedwater heaters (by reviewing the heat exchanger group with plant-specific data). The
GALL report (NUREG-1801) [Ref. 29] outlines the required aging management programs for
heat exchangers. Passive SSCs susceptible to aging are identified together with typical
materials, environments, and aging mechanisms and effects. The active components of the heat
6-5
exchangers are excluded from aging management review (they are addressed under the
performance monitoring required by the Maintenance Rule under 10CFR50.65). EPRI 1003056
[Ref. 43] provides details on how to implement license renewal programs (surveillance,
maintenance, procedures, inspections) for in-scope mechanical equipment.
6.2
Expected Lifetimes of Feedwater Heaters
A new feedwater heater today would be expected to last 20 years or more (the lifetime of the
materials in the tubes); however, that has not been the case in the past (due to age-related
degradation, specific design problems, material problems, etc.). Section 4 of this document
provides an overview of FW heater failures and problems as identified in various industry
databases.
The expected lifetime is based upon the expected lifetimes of the various materials in the FW
heater. The tubes are the most sensitive sub-components and will usually be the limiting factor
in overall heater lifetime. Shell thinning due to erosion is also a factor, although good
surveillance programs should identify shell thinning before the problem is serious (see Section
5.1.2). But it is worth noting that 38% of the items involving feedwater heaters from the INPO
Plant Events database were discoveries of shell thinning. From NPRDS, the percentage of items
involving the shell was about 4%; however catastrophic shell failures can impact a plant for
months, due to FW heater isolation, possible power reductions, potential damage and personnel
injury, and root cause investigations.
As noted in Section 5.6, a FW heater is approaching time for retubing, rebundling, or complete
replacement when approximately 10% of the tubes have been plugged [Refs. 11 and 23].
6.3
Technical Obsolescence
Many systems in nuclear power plants (particularly those with electronic instrumentation) are
susceptible to technical obsolescence. For LCM maintenance planning, these systems or
components may have to be replaced or modified to account for the unavailability of spare parts.
In these cases, the likelihood and timing of the need for replacement will be determined by the
failure (or degradation) rate of the equipment. The feasibility and cost of reverse engineering the
obsolete components also needs to be considered.
For feedwater heaters, obsolescence is not a concern because they are strictly mechanical
components which can be repaired over long periods of time and replacements can be fabricated
(if necessary), and although they are subject to aging, they are not expected to cause any
operational vulnerabilities based on the unavailability of replacement components. The
obsolescence of the feedwater heater controls (which is an important issue) is addressed in EPRI
1007425 [Ref. 6]. To ascertain whether a given system or component is susceptible to technical
obsolescence, the evaluation methodology provided in the EPRI LCM Sourcebook Overview
[Ref. 1] is utilized (as a first step). Table 6-2 provides for the weighting of the various issues
with obsolescence. The ranking guidance for the table is presented below, along with a short
evaluation of the scoring for feedwater heaters.
6-6

Table 6-2
Application of Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Technical Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Score
1.
Is the SSC still being manufactured and will it be

available for at least the next five years?
5.0
2.
Is there more than one supplier for the SSC for the
foreseeable future?
3.0
3.
Can the plant or outside suppliers manufacture the SSC

in a reasonable time (i.e., within a refueling outage)?
3.0
4.
Are there other sources or contingencies (from other

plants, shared inventory, stock-piled parts,
refurbishments, secondary suppliers, imitation parts,
commercial dedications, etc.) available in case of
emergency?
3.0
Is the SSC frequency of failure per year times the

number of SSCs in the plant times the remaining
operating life (in years) equal to or lower than the
number of stocked SSCs in the warehouse?
3.0
6.
Can the spare parts inventory be maintained for at least

the next five years?
3.0
7.
Is the SSC immune to significant aging degradation?
1.0
8.
Can new designs, technology, and concepts be readily

integrated with the existing configuration (hardwaresoftware, digital-analog, solid-state, miniaturized
electronics, smart components, etc.)?
3.0
Is a technical upgrade desirable, commensurate with

safety, and cost-effective?
3.0
5.
9.
Total Obsolescence Score:
Yes
5
3
3
17
Ranking Guidance for Table 6-2
If the total score is < 6 (RED), then the SSC obsolescence is serious and will have an
immediate impact on LCM planning. Potential options to address obsolescence and
contingency planning should be identified.
If the total score is between 6 and 10 (YELLOW), the SSC may have long-term concerns
with obsolescence.
If the total score is >10 (GREEN), then obsolescence is not of concern for the SSC.
The estimated score (on a generic industry basis) for feedwater heaters is greater than 10, with
firm YES answers for questions 1, 2, 4, 6 (for smaller sub-components), and 9. Question 5 is
not really applicable because plants do not keep spare feedwater heaters in stock (although repair
parts for sub-components are stocked). Therefore, obsolescence is not an issue for feedwater
heaters. Some plants may need to address issues with procurement and test equipment
6-7
availability on a going-forward basis, especially with respect to the potential for license renewal
(an extended 20 years of plant operation). For the feedwater heater controls, EPRI 1007425
estimated that for most instrumentation, the total score will probably be below 6.
6.4
Expected Lifetimes for Preventive Replacement or Redesign
EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] addresses component lifetimes on a material basis in Section 8. Early
heater tubing materials (the tubes are the most sensitive component) were admiralty brass,
copper, and copper-nickel alloys. These materials have high thermal conductivity and some
corrosion resistance. In the 1960s, as fossil units grew in size and supercritical units were built,
carbon steel and Monel (70/30 nickel copper) became popular for high-pressure heater
applications. The emergence of copper deposits in boilers and on turbine blades forced the
industry to move towards stainless steel and carbon steel materials. In the nuclear industry,
stainless steel tubes began to replace all copper alloys in feedwater heaters. The most common
types of tube materials are 304-SS (TP304N), ASME SA286-TP349, AL-6XN, and Seacure.
The most recent tubing material introduced is ASME SA213 T-22. Type 439 SS (ferritic) is also
being selected more for FW heater tubes. EPRI 1003470 provides a comparison for these
materials and feedwater heater lifetimes.
The average life expectancy for a carbon steel tubed heater is approximately 12 years. The
average life expectancy for a T-22 tubed heater is 15 to 20 years. The average life expectancy
for a 304-SS tubed heater is 20 years. The expected lifetimes of other heater components (shell,
impingement plates, supports, etc.) is dependent on the maintenance and surveillance performed
on the heater (and sometimes on the design). For example, impingement plates which are
installed as completely perpendicular to the direction of steam flow will not last as long as plates
which are curved or are installed at an angle. The lifetime of the tubes is also dependent upon
the quality and the spacing of the tube supports (vibration problems from poor support design are
a common issue). Likewise, design problems which cause flashing in the drains cooler zone will
lead to rapid tube damage and also erosion of supports and the shell itself. Detailed material
evaluations and comparisons may also be found in EPRI GS-6913 [Ref. 20].
The values given are indicative and are for planning purposes only. Depending upon the
effectiveness of each plants maintenance and condition monitoring programs (along with the
water chemistry program), these values could vary widely.
6-8
7
GENERIC ALTERNATIVE LCM PLANS
This section addresses Steps 12 to 17 in the LCM planning flowchart (Figure 2-2). The EPRI
LCM Demonstration Project Report [Ref. 2] summarizes alternative LCM plans as follows:
Following the assessment of aging and reliability, potential alternative LCM plans
should be identified. The objective here should be to explore whether there are
potentially better ways of addressing the aging management of the SSC. These inputs
can come from plant staff, but input should also be solicited from outside experts and
industry benchmarking projects.
The following guidance for these steps includes the identification of possible plant operating life
strategies and the development of alternative LCM plans that are compatible with or integral to
the strategies identified. Also provided is a hypothetical illustration of alternative plans for
feedwater heaters, with the attendant discussions of the logic used to build the alternatives along
with the derivatives of the assumptions.
With an expected FW lifetime of approximately 20 years (less than the overall plant lifetime),
utilities will need to plan for several FW heater replacements for the duration of plant operation.
7.1
Plant Operating Strategies and Types of LCM Planning Alternatives
The determination of LCM planning alternatives will be driven to a large extent by the plant
operating strategies that (implicitly or explicitly) are being followed or evaluated, and by the
current reliability of the FW heaters. Accordingly, the set of LCM planning alternatives to be
evaluated is quite plant-specific. Typical plant operating strategies and standard approaches to
LCM planning alternatives are presented and discussed below.
7.1.1 Plant Strategy 1: Operate plant for currently licensed period of 40 years
This strategy requires minimizing risk during the remaining operating period until the plants
license expires, and identifying the limiting SSCs which could result in premature power
reduction or equipment replacements possibly forcing an economic decision regarding early
decommissioning. Feedwater heaters would certainly qualify as a limiting component, given
their importance to power production and their influence on the plants overall heat rate. LCM
plan alternatives under this strategy include:
LCM Plan Alternative 1A: A base case to determine the cost of the activities performed
under the current maintenance plan, assuming that the activities will continue as-is until the
7-1
Generic Alternative LCM Plans
end of the licensed plant life. This case also assumes the continuation of the existing
maintenance program without any major capital investments, unless absolutely necessary.
LCM Plan Alternative 1B: An alternative plan in which the current maintenance plan is
optimized and low-cost activities are added to provide improvements in reliability.
LCM Plan Alternative 1C: An alternative plan in which the current maintenance plan is
optimized and an aggressive PM program is implemented to reduce equipment failures, lost
power production, and regulatory risk.
LCM Plan Alternative 1D: An alternative plan in which the current maintenance plan is
optimized and older components are replaced with more reliable equipment. For the
feedwater heaters, this could include new tubes, new shield plates, and other internal subcomponent replacements. In the most extreme situation, it would involve an entirely new
feedwater heater.
7.1.2 Plant Strategy 2: Operate plant for 60 years with license renewal
This strategy recognizes the potential for license renewal and extended operation of the plant.
Major investments will be required to achieve extended operation. These investments can only
be justified by the additional revenue generated in the period of extended operation (20 years).
LCM planning alternatives considered for feedwater heaters under this strategy should include
the following:
LCM Plan Alternative 2A: A rigorous preparation for license renewal with an aggressive
aging management program, system/component performance enhancements, and timely
component replacements and/or upgrades. This LCM plan includes replacement of
feedwater heater components in a timely manner. This can even include replacement of the
entire FW heater.
LCM Plan Alternative 2B: Preparing for license renewal with an aggressive PM and PdM
program, but delaying plans for major capital improvements until the actual extended license
is implemented (i.e., year 39 of plant life). This alternative involves the position that the
expected lifetime for a feedwater heater is at least 20 years (with proper maintenance and
surveillance). This plan could include consideration of cleaning the FW heater tubes.
Every plant should prepare a base case for 60 years of operation (to address the remaining
lifetime). This will include actions to reach the limit of 60 years, which will probably include
the replacement of several FW heaters on some sort of prioritization (rolling) schedule.
7.1.3 Other Plant Strategies: (Power Uprate, Early Decommissioning, >60 Years)
Many plants have pursued various types of power uprate programs to increase the megawatts
thermal and megawatts electric output. With respect to feedwater heaters, this has caused some
unique difficulties because power uprate programs often involve increased feedwater flow
(leading to higher velocities in the FW heater tubes, and the potential for subsequent tube
vibration and erosion). Heat transfer rates are also affected, putting more demands on FW heater
operation. This alternative must be reviewed carefully with respect to the FW heaters in order to
obtain the maximum benefit to the plant. INPO issued SER (Significant Event Report) 5-02
7-2
[Ref. 40] in August 2002 to address problems with power uprates at nuclear units involving
inadequate analysis, design, or implementation which caused over 40 plant events between 1997
and 2002. Many of these events involved secondary-side equipment like feedwater heaters. In
terms of license renewal and power uprate and implementation projects, the impact on the
feedwater heaters needs to be carefully considered to avoid any problems or any acceleration of
degradation.
With respect to early decommissioning, this alternative would probably lead to the continuation
of the current maintenance plan for the FW heaters. Future equipment replacements would
probably be considered only if the failure rate was so high that overall unit operation was
strongly impacted (frequent shutdowns, large drops in power production, a large drop in overall
plant heat rate). The input of the plant Thermal Performance Engineer is critical in evaluating
how the feedwater heaters fit into the overall maintenance and operation of the plant. Section 8
of EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] gives guidance on major repair and replacement decisions.
7.2
Examples of Suitable Alternative LCM Plans
For each alternative LCM plan proposed, detailed maintenance activities and schedules need to
be identified. Each plan will involve some mixture of the LCM approaches shown in steps 13 to
17 of Figure 2-2. The plans might involve the following:
Adjusting the frequency of time-directed maintenance to enhance the reliability of the

feedwater heaters (or to reduce maintenance costs)
Considering that diagnostic predictive maintenance switch from a time-directed basis to a

condition-directed basis
Performing preventive and non-invasive maintenance activities on-line if feasible. Note:

some of the movement in this area has caused unforeseen problems in the industry. EPRI
and INPO documents should be reviewed to determine what activities actually may be
performed on-line. Plant operating procedures that specify equipment that may be taken out
of service should also be reviewed to establish a clear pathway for on-line maintenance of
feedwater heaters and associated equipment.
Addressing tasks that facilitate or enable operating changes which minimize or equalize
component wear.
Adding preventive and predictive maintenance activities that may enhance the reliability of
the feedwater heaters. A number of these activities are discussed in Sections 5.1 and 5.2;
other suggestions may be sought from other power plants or industry working groups. If
improvements in heat transfer capability are needed, FW heater cleaning could be
considered.
One alternative that will almost certainly be considered, if only as a base case for comparison
with actual changes, is the option of continuing the current scheme for the feedwater heaters.
This case is presented with the presumption that existing maintenance practices will continue and
that present failure rates will apply. However, in characterizing this base case, the wear-out of
the major components (and the need for replacement) and the acceleration of the failure rates as
components reach their end-of-life condition must be considered.
7-3
Another option to be considered for FW heaters involves the cleaning of the tubes, particularly if
performance monitoring has shown that thermal performance of a given heater has declined.
This can be done during an outage with no impact on plant operation. The improvement in heat
transfer capability can be determined via a comparison of data from before and after the tube
cleaning.
In developing and reviewing each alternative task for LCM planning, all costs and benefits
should be considered and utilized in the analysis. This includes the cost of labor and materials,
the cost of planning itself, the costs associated with lost generation (declining thermal efficiency,
heater derating, and plant trips) and replacement power, and any potential regulatory costs (due
to NRC involvement or financial oversight from state regulators).
The base case for the feedwater heaters includes all the current surveillance and maintenance
done on the feedwater heaters at any given plant. For the purposes of LCM planning, these costs
will include engineering and craft labor, equipment costs, and vendor costs for surveillance
testing and inspections. For some plants, a certain number of FW heaters are inspected each
outage, for other plants, problems heaters are already identified, and the outage work involves
checking the condition of the current degradation. Other plants (plants which have recently
replaced FW heaters) may not require such detailed inspections, and their average costs may be
lower. It should be noted that over the life of the plant, the predictive and preventive
maintenance costs may be able to be controlled and remain fairly constant, but corrective
maintenance costs will increase with time.
It should be noted that an engineering evaluation needs to be performed on FW heaters for any
decision involving power uprate or FW heater upgrades. Due to increased flow requirements,
some existing heaters may not be acceptable under such plans, and additional changes may be
necessary.
7.3
Hypothetical Illustration of an LCM Planning Alternative for

Feedwater Heaters
A simple hypothetical case outline is evaluated to illustrate the process of developing LCM
Planning Alternatives for the feedwater heaters. The various alternatives mentioned above are
evaluated here.
7.3.1 Alternative A Base Case
Alternative A (the base case) is to continue the current maintenance program and to enhance or
upgrade the program only if absolutely necessary. Major efforts, such as tube rebundling or FW
heater replacement, are considered only if required.
This alternative would be selected if a plant already has a successful FW heater maintenance and
surveillance program, as verified by the LCM economic analysis showing no benefit from
increased PM and/or PdM activities. The cost would be (approximately) the same as the plants
current program, with minor adjustments in the future for possible tube plugging, and additional
7-4
NDE as the FW heaters age. For plants with above industry average problems or failure rates,
this option is clearly not recommended (although plant-specific data will reveal the situation).
7.3.2 Alternative B Step Increase in NDE Examinations of the FW Heaters
This alternative considers a step increase in the NDE examination of the FW Heaters, which
means an increase in eddy current testing (of the tubes and the shell), and additional
examinations of the tubesheet, the impingement plates, the channel head, and the inlet/outlet
nozzles. The purpose of this alternative is to offer increased surveillance so that costly surprises
(i.e., tube failures) can be avoided. As a rough estimate, this alternative involves an increase in
the overall maintenance spending for the FW Heaters, due to more frequent (and more detailed)
inspection. Part of the increase will involve engineering time to develop more detailed
documents to track the condition of the FW Heaters (drawings, evaluation reports for NDE data,
etc.). There may also be increased engineering costs as the component engineer and possibly the
thermal performance engineer (and even system engineers) educate themselves further about
feedwater heaters. There may also be additional costs related to tube plugging, sleeving, and
other maintenance actions (arising from better surveillance data).
7.3.3 Alternative C Major Maintenance (Tube Rebundle, etc.)
This alternative considers a major repair effort on a damaged FW Heater. This effort will
involve a large outlay to correct problems that may have been known for some time, but have not
been completely addressed. This effort may involve re-tubing or rebundling. Re-tubing a heater
involves replacing only the tubes. Rebundling a heater involves replacing the tubes, the
tubesheet, the tube supports, and the baffle plates. Retubing is typically an option for lowpressure, straight tube heaters only. Rebundling is usually an option for just low-pressure heaters
as well. Individual tubes can be replaced in high-pressure heaters, although this is not typical.
It should be noted that the difference in cost between a rebundle and a complete FW Heater
replacement is usually only about 5% or less. This factor should be considered when a heater is
experiencing repeated degradation problems.
7.3.4 Alternative D FW Heater Replacement
This alternative involves the complete replacement of a FW Heater. Such a determination is
made when the present heater is at its limit with respect to tube plugging, and further degradation
is expected. Complete replacement is also a consideration if the shell is damaged (eroded or
cracked) beyond a reasonable repair (i.e., a localized weld repair or patch).
As a rough estimate, when 10% of the tubes in a FW heater are plugged, the heater is
approaching its end of life. Further plugging would only increase the negative economic impact
on the plant.
Section 8 of EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11] contains detailed information on how to plan for the
procurement of a new FW Heater, including a detailed list of materials for all the sub7-5
components involved. The technical and commercial properties (cost) are also presented. EPRI
GS-6913 [Ref. 20] also addresses FW heater replacement in detail.
7.3.5 Composite Evaluation
A composite evaluation of the alternatives is listed in Table 7-1. This composite shows the
attributes for consideration and provides a summary which can be used as a starting point for
plant-specific evaluations (with plant-specific technical data and economic analysis).
As discussed in Section 4 of this LCM Sourcebook, as estimated industry generic failure rate for
feedwater heaters has been determined to be approximately 0.05 to 0.1 failures per plant per
year. This value reflects the fact that nuclear plants typically have 12 or more feedwater heaters.
See Section 4.5 for an explanation of the generic industry failure rate estimation.
Table 7-1 presents a comparison of the various hypothetical alternatives.
Table 7-1
FW Heater Composite Evaluation for LCM Planning (generic)
Attribute
Plant Impact
(Lost Generation)
Initial Cost
Future Work Needed
Composite
Alternative B
Alternative C
Alternative D
Higher Impact
Highest Impact
Additional Outage Work

Some Benefit
Major Outage Item

Good Benefit if a Heater
is Failing
Major Outage Item

Good Benefit if a Heater
is Failing
+20% of Alternative A
$700,000*
$800,000*
Minimal Impact
Yes
Better than Base Case
No, Not if Shell is

Properly Maintained
Needed if Heater Tubes
are Failing Regularly
Not Expected
Needed if Heater is
Degrading Beyond Repair
*Note that these values are the cost of the tubes and the replacement heater only. The design and
modification costs, construction costs, and testing costs are not included. These can often be
significant (depending upon heater accessibility, location, and orientation), and may cost much
more than the new tubes or replacement heater itself. Also, there will be a difference between
the cost of a low-pressure FW heater and a high-pressure FW heater, and this difference can be
significant (due to higher pressures and temperatures and more stringent ASME Section VIII
construction criteria). In general, it takes about 1 to 2 months to prepare a new FW heater
specification (longer if more time is needed to assemble data or if the engineering data is not
readily available). The lead time for ordering a tube rebundle is approximately 6 months, and the
lead time for an entirely new heater is approximately 8-10 months. Depending upon FW heater
accessibility and orientation, the actual rebundle or replacement time (schedule) may vary from 2
to 6 weeks.
7-6
The values for a heater rebundle cost and a full heater replacement were taken from
communication with mechanical component engineers in the industry who have specified new
FW heaters and other heater repairs. These values are indicative and are given as general
estimates only. Actual cost is highly dependent upon FW heater location, accessibility, and
orientation.
The expectation for LCM planning is that a FW heater maintenance scheme will be based upon
an evaluation of the current status of the plant equipment, rather than a complete change in
direction with respect to plant maintenance and surveillance. For a plant with FW heater
degradation problems, Alternatives C and D will very likely be selected if the current equipment
is negatively affecting operation. For plants with good equipment and a well-developed
maintenance and surveillance program (and a pro-active repair program), a choice in line with
Alternative B will likely be considered, even if the base case is working well (for future
successful heater operation and possible consideration of license renewal). The potential for
license renewal will also drive plants to consider FW heater replacements in a controlled manner,
in order to achieve the 60-year lifetime.
As mentioned in Section 6, the average expectancy for carbon steel tubed heaters is about 12
years. The average life expectancy for T-22 tubed heaters is 15 to 20 years, and the average life
expectancy of a type 304-SS tubed heater is about 20 years. This data will figure into any major
repair/replacement decisions.
7.4
Additional Evaluation of FW Heater Options
In assessing the most economical approaches to major FW heater maintenance decisions, the age
of the FW heater, the design performance, and the impact on outage time for a heater
replacement must be evaluated.
First, the age is important because any heater older than 15 years will be facing increasing
difficulties going forward. Even a FW heater with 15 years of satisfactory performance will
show aging degradation at an increasing rate.
Second, the performance of the specific heater design will require evaluation to determine if
reliable performance can continue. Some heaters have design problems with poor tube supports
(or supports placed too far apart), problems with undersized or poorly oriented impingement
plates, problems with poor separation for the drains cooler zone (leading to steam entry and/or
flashing), and problems with pass partition plates. These problems can be repaired (to varying
degrees), but any new heater specification should avoid the problems of the past.
Third, the impact on outage duration for a FW heater replacement can be significant depending
upon the amount of work necessary for installation (as previously mentioned). It is also
important to consider how much of the total labor will be from the fabrication shop, and how
much will be performed at the site.
7-7
EPRI NP-4507-V3 [Ref. 23] contains a detailed discussion of cost evaluation, which considers
shop labor, field labor, replacement power cost, and material costs for heater rebundles and
heater replacements. All of these factors need to be addressed in plant-specific LCM planning.
7-8
8
GUIDANCE FOR ESTIMATING FUTURE FAILURE
RATES
This section addresses a part of step number 18 of Figure 2-2. It must be recognized that failure
rates are a main driver of the LCM planning process, and knowledge about estimating future
failure rates will directly impact decisions about component maintenance and replacement. In
addition, as components age, their vulnerability to the applicable aging mechanisms increases.
General guidance for estimating SSC future failure rates can be found in Section 2.6 of the LCM
Planning Sourcebook Overview Report (EPRI 1003058) [Ref. 1]. Below are some useful ideas
for estimating failure rates in FW heater LCM planning studies.
Sections 6.1 and 6.2 provide a discussion on the estimated life of FW heaters. This data is
not conclusive, because there is no set figure for the duration of a FW heater lifetime, but it is
a beginning point in estimating the expected remaining life of a FW heater (based upon
operating experience gained to date). If in-kind replacements are made, existing failure
rates may be applied for the future (and possibly extended, given improvements in
technology and maintenance). Specific communications with equipment manufacturers is
key in developing this information (with respect to LCM planning). The generic industry
failure rate discussed in Section 4 may be used in conjunction with plant-specific data to
establish a plant-specific failure rate for feedwater heaters.
Plants with FW heater trending programs can extract failure data (for tubes and other subcomponents) and compute failure rates directly. Data can be plotted to determine if the aging
effects previously identified are being exhibited and/or if the current PM programs are
effective. A sufficient duration of time for data collection is necessary (at least 10-15 years).
A review of Corrective Work Orders (WOs) can provide a means of following the FW heater
problems and may be used to compute failure rates. The criterion of failure must be clearly
defined. This WO review should encompass a long enough span of time to generate
meaningful results (for FW heaters, more than 10-15 years, in order to observe the aging
effects and to evaluate the effectiveness of plant maintenance). Repetitive problems must be
identified and categorized as such in LCM planning.
The data presented in Section 4 provides a background for understanding how FW heater
problems can impact plant operation.
It is important to differentiate between the FW heaters themselves and the FW heater

controls. A separate EPRI LCM sourcebook (EPRI 1007425) has been prepared for FW
heater controls, and should be reviewed for these components. Often, problems in the
control scheme (or with the instrumentation) for the FW heaters leads to major component
problems (erosion, vibration, corrosion, etc.) in the future.
8-1
Guidance for Estimating Future Failure Rates
The feedwater heaters are installed with strings of heaters in the plant (for LP and HP
applications). A single string out of service would rarely cause the loss of the entire system
function (and plant shutdown), but it would require some degree of power reduction. While
component failure (and the repair/replacement impact) must be addressed in LCM planning,
the consideration of lost power generation may be limited to just power reductions (small or
large) rather than complete shutdown.
Maintenance Rule programs and PRA evaluations emphasize functional failures rather than
degraded performance. Feedwater heater LCM plans should consider both.
PRA models may assume that the probability of catastrophic failures of passive heat
exchangers is insignificant compared to the probability of other component failures.
However, these passive failures (as discussed in Section 4) are of considerable concern in
LCM planning (due to the impact of lost power production and the cost of replacement
power). The complete failure of a feedwater heater shell must be addressed in LCM
planning, especially if plant data shows evidence of wall thinning.
The effects of any power uprate on a nuclear unit must be considered when evaluating future
failure rates. INPO SER 5-02 addresses the fact that over 40 plant events have occurred from
1997 to 2002 as a result of inadequate analysis, design, or implementation of nuclear plant
power uprates. Many of these events involved feedwater heaters and related secondary-side
equipment. The effects of power uprate on the feedwater heaters (increased FW flow,
increased heat transfer demand, etc.) must be reviewed and considered on a going-forward
basis.
The potential for license renewal (with an extended 20 years of plant operation) will
introduce new considerations in LCM planning, particularly for components that normally
experience age-degradation at a slow rate, but can experience damage to vulnerable
components in just one cycle (like feedwater heaters). LCM planning for the period of
extended operation must account for possible feedwater heater replacement if the plant
undergoes a general refurbishment prior to (or at the beginning of) the 20 year period.
In summary, failure rate predictions for feedwater heaters are made using the guidance of the
LCM Sourcebook Overview Report [Ref. 1]. The generic industry failure rate is discussed in
Section 4 of this document and in Section 5 of EPRI 1003470 [Ref. 11]. This rate is based upon
available data and is uncertain. The plant-specific PRA and Maintenance Rule records will be an
important source of information in determining a plant-specific failure rate (along with all the
maintenance records, of course). The LCM planning process should be fairly complete with
carefully defined activities for each of the LCM alternative plans (as they are developed). In this
way, the influence of new or additional PM activities, implementation of component
replacements, and plant modifications (power uprate, license renewal, etc.) can be appropriately
considered in estimating future failure rates for input into LCM economic evaluations.
8-2
9
INFORMATION SOURCES AND REFERENCES
1. EPRI Technical Report 1003058, Life Cycle Management Planning Sourcebooks

Overview Report, December 2001.
2. EPRI Technical Report 1000806, Demonstration of Life Cycle Management Planning For
Systems, Structures, and Components, With Pilot Applications at Oconee and Prairie Island
Nuclear Stations, January 2001.
3. EPRI Technical Report 1003059, Life Cycle Management Planning at V.C. Summer
Nuclear Plant: Main Condenser, Radiation Monitoring System, and Nuclear Safety-Related
HVAC Chilled Water, December 2001.
4. EPRI Technical Report 1003060, Life Cycle Management Planning at Wolf Creek
Generating Station: EDG, Main Steam, and Feedwater Isolation Valves, and Reactor
Protection System, December 2001.
5. EPRI Technical Report 1006686, Nuclear Power Plant Life Cycle Management Planning
Implementation Demonstration: Reference Manual and Tutorial for the LcmPLATO
Database Application, Version 1.0, January 2002.
6. EPRI Technical Report 1007425, Life Cycle Management Planning Sourcebooks Volume
VI Feedwater Heater Controls, March 2003.
7. SAND93-7070, Aging Management Guideline for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants
Heat Exchangers, June 1994.
8. EPRI Technical Report NP-1558, A Review of Equipment Aging Theory and Technology,
September 1980.
9. EPRI Technical Report TR-100844, Nuclear Power Plant Common Aging Terminology,
February 1992.
10. EPRI Technical Report TR-106853, The Maintenance Engineer Fundamentals Handbook:
An EPRI Course, October 1996.
11. EPRI Technical Report 1003470, Feedwater Heater Maintenance Guide, May 2002.
12. EPRI Technical Report TR-102134-R5, PWR Secondary Water Chemistry Guidelines
Revision 5, May 2000.
9-1
Information Sources and References
13. EPRI Technical Report TR-107422-V1, Thermal Performance Engineers Handbook

Volume 1, March 1998.
14. EPRI Technical Report TR-107422-V2, Thermal Performance Engineers Handbook
Volume 2, October 1998.
15. EPRI Technical Report TR-106741, Heat Exchangers: An Overview of Maintenance and
Operations, March 1997
16. EPRI NP-7552, Heat Exchanger Performance Monitoring Guidelines, December 1991.
17. EPRI GS-6935, Feedwater Heaters Maintenance and Repair Technology: Reducing Outage
Cost, August 1990.
18. EPRI CS-1776, Failure Cause Analysis Feedwater Heaters, April 1981.
19. EPRI Technical Report TR-106857-V32, Preventive Maintenance Basis Volume 32: Heat
Exchangers Tube Type, July 1998.
20. EPRI GS-6913, Feedwater Heaters: Replacement Specification Guidelines, August 1990.
21. EPRI NP-4057, Volume 1, Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater Handbook Volume 1:
Primer, June 1985.
22. EPRI NP-4057, Volume 2, Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater Handbook Volume 2: Design
and Procurement Guidelines, June 1985.
23. EPRI NP-4057, Volume 3, Nuclear Plant Feedwater Heater Handbook Volume 3:
Operation and Maintenance Guidelines, June 1985.
24. EPRI GS-7417, Feedwater Heater Survey, August 1991.
25. EPRI CS-3184, Corrosion-Related Failures in Feedwater Heaters, July 1983.
26. EPRI Technical Report TR-109546, Heat Rate Improvement Reference Manual, July 1998.
27. EPRI Technical Report 1003103, EPRI-Lite, December 2001.
28. NUREG-1800, Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for
Nuclear Power Plants, April 2001.
29. NUREG-1801, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report, April 2001.
30. HEI Standards for Closed Feedwater Heaters, 6th Edition, Heat Exchange Institute, 1998.
31. EPRI 1006998, Life Cycle Management Plan for Feedwater Heater and Moisture Separator
Controls at Hope Creek Generating Station, March 2003.
32. INPO AP-913, Rev. 1, Equipment Reliability Process Description, November 2001.
9-2
Information Sources and References
33. Standards of the Tubular Manufacturers Association, 6th Edition, 1978.

34. NUREG-1377, Rev. 4, NRC Research Program on Plant Aging: Listing and Summaries of
Reports Issued Through September 1993, published December 1993.
35. EPRI Technical Report 1003282, PM Basis Version 4.0 with Vulnerability Analysis
Module, July 2002.
36. EPRI Technical Report TR-106858-R1, Preventive Maintenance Basis Project Overview
Report, November 1998.
37. EPRI Technical Report 1007079, Reliability and Risk Significance, December 2001.
38. EPRI 1000260, SysMon 2.0 Users Manual System Monitoring by Systems Engineers, 37
System Templates, July 2000.
39. ASME Performance Test Code PTC 12.1, Closed Feedwater Heaters, published 2000.
40. SER 5-02, Lessons Learned from Power Uprates, INPO, August 2002.
41. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rates of Initiating Events at U.S. Nuclear Power
Plants 1987-1995, NUREG/CR-5750, February 1999.
42. NEI 95-10, Rev. 3, Industry Guideline for Implementing the Requirements of 10 CFR Part
54 The License Renewal Rule, April 2001.
43. EPRI 1003056, Non-Class 1 Mechanical Implementation Guideline and Mechanical Tools,
Revision 3, November 2001.
44. NEIL (Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited) Loss Control Standards, Updated September
2002.
45. EPRI 1003286, Repair Technology for Degraded Pressure Vessels and Heat Exchanger
Shells: Repair and Replacement Applications Center Task 91, December 2002.
46. EPRI 1009159, Life Cycle Management Plan for Main Generator & Exciter at the South
Texas Project Generating Station, September 2003.
47. EPRI 1009731, LCM Economic Risk Tools Demonstration, January 2004.
9-3
10
ACRONYMS
ABB
Asea Brown Boveri
AE
Acoustic Emission
AMG
Aging Management Guideline
AMR
Aging Management Review
ANSI
American National Standards Institite
ASME
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASNT
American Society of Non-Destructive Testing
ASTM
American Society of Testing Materials
AVT
All-Volatile Treatment
AWS
American Welding Society
B&PV
Boiler & Pressure Vessel
B&W
Babcock & Wilcox
BOP
Balance-of-Plant
BWR
Boiling Water Reactor
Btu
British Thermal Units
CS
Carbon Steel
CE
Combustion Engineering
DCA
Drains Cooler Approach
ECP
Electrochemical Potential
ECT
Eddy Current Testing
EEI
Edison Electric Institute
EPIX
Equipment Performance & Information Exchange
EPRI
Electric Power Research Institute
ET
Electromagnetic Testing
FAC
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
FMAC
Fossil Maintenance Applications Center
FFT
Final Feedwater Temperature

10-1
Acronyms
FIV
FW
Feedwater
FWH
Feedwater Heater
GADS
Generating Availability Data System
GARS
Generating Availability Reliability System
GE
General Electric
GL
Generic Letter
HEI
Heat Exchange Institute
HP
High Pressure
ID
Inner Diameter
IGA
Inter-Granular Attack
IGSCC
Inter-Granular Stress Corrosion Cracking
INPO
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
IRIS
Internal Rotary Inspection System
IRT
Infrared Technology
ITHT
Individual Tube Hydrostatic Test
LCM
Life Cycle Management
LER
Licensee Event Report
LP
Low Pressure
LR
License Renewal
MIC
Microbiologically-Influenced Corrosion
MPFF
Maintenance Preventable Functional Failure
MR
Maintenance Rule
MSR
Moisture Separator Reheater
MT
Magnetic Particle Testing
MTTR
Mean-Time-to-Repair
NEIL
Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited
NERC
North American Electric Reliability Council
NDE
Non-Destructive Examination
NMAC
Nuclear Maintenance Applications Center
NPAR
Nuclear Plant Aging Reasearch
NPRDS
Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System
NPV
Net Present Value
10-2
Acronyms
NRC
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
O&MR
Operations & Maintenance Reminder
OD
Outer Diameter
OE
Operating Experience
OPEC
Operating Plant Experience Code
pH
Percent Hydrogen
PM
Preventive Maintenance
PdM
Predictive Maintenance
ppm
Parts per Million
PT
Liquid Penetrant Testing
PTC
Performance Test Code
PWR
Pressurized Water Reactor
RCM
Reliability-Centered Maintenance
RFEC
Remote Field Eddy Current
RVT
Remote Visual Testing
SCC
SEE-IN
Significant Event Evaluation Information Network
SEN
Significant Event Notification
SER
Significant Event Report
SOER
Significant Operating Experience Report
SS
Stainless Steel
SSC
System, Structure, Component
SYSMON
System Monitoring (an EPRI tool for system engineers)
TGSCC
Trans-Granular Stress Corrosion Cracking
TEMA
Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association
TR
Temperature Rise
TTD
Terminal Temperature Difference
UCLF
Unplanned Capacity Loss Factor
UT
Ultrasonic Testing
VT
Visual Inspection Testing
Westinghouse
10-3
Program:
Nuclear Power
About EPRI
EPRI creates science and technology solutions for
the global energy and energy services industry. U.S.
electric utilities established the Electric Power
Research Institute in 1973 as a nonprofit research
consortium for the benefit of utility members, their
customers, and society. Now known simply as EPRI,
the company provides a wide range of innovative
products and services to more than 1000 energyrelated organizations in 40 countries. EPRIs
multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers
draws on a worldwide network of technical and
business expertise to help solve todays toughest
energy and environmental problems.
EPRI. Electrify the World
2003 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.
EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric
Power Research Institute, Inc.
Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America
1009073
EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA
800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

Feedwater Heater Source Book

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Feedwater Heater Source Book

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Life Cycle Management Sourcebooks

Volume 10: Feedwater Heaters

Life Cycle Management

Final Report, December 2003

EPRI Project Manager

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 1-1

Purpose of LCM Sourcebook .................................................................................... 2-1

Relationship of Sourcebook to LCM Process ............................................................ 2-1

3 BASIC INFORMATION ON FEEDWATER HEATERS ........................................................ 3-1

Safety and Operational Significance.......................................................................... 3-1

Feedwater Heater Function and Configurations ........................................................ 3-1

Feedwater Heater System and Component Boundaries...........................................3-14

Scope of Equipment Covered by the Feedwater Heater Sourcebook .......................3-14

4 HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE DATA FROM INDUSTRY OPERATING

Nuclear Industry Experience ..................................................................................... 4-2

Qualitative Data ................................................................................................ 4-4

Quantitative Data (EPRI, INPO EPIX/NPRDS, NRC)........................................ 4-8

EPRI PM Basis Templates ..............................................................................4-14

Generic Communications and Other Reports ...........................................................4-18

NRC Communications .....................................................................................4-19

INPO SEE-IN Communications .......................................................................4-20

INPO NPRDS/EPIX Data.................................................................................4-23

Experience in Fossil Power Generation and Industrial Facilities ......................4-26

Codes and Standards (Mandatory, Guidance, Associations, Societies) ...................4-28

Plant Performance Enhancement Program Technical Library ..................................4-30

Generic Industry Failure Rate Estimation Summary .................................................4-30

5 GUIDANCE FOR PLANT-SPECIFIC SSC CONDITION & PERFORMANCE

Compiling Feedwater Heater Operating and Performance History ............................ 5-1

Review of Diagnostic Tests and Monitoring Devices/Data ................................ 5-3

Review of Current Maintenance Plans .....................................................................5-11

Current Condition and Performance Assessment.....................................................5-11

Condition Monitoring Technologies, Tests, and Diagnostics.....................................5-13

System Condition Monitoring ...........................................................................5-13

Component Condition Monitoring ....................................................................5-15

Water Chemistry and Corrosion ...............................................................................5-17

Feedwater Heater Repairs (Corrective Maintenance)...............................................5-18

Tube Leak Detection Methods .........................................................................5-19

Tube Sleeving .................................................................................................5-21

Tubesheet and Tubesheet Joints.....................................................................5-21

Shell Repairs ...................................................................................................5-22

FW Heater Cleaning ........................................................................................5-23

Spare Parts .....................................................................................................5-23

6 GENERIC AGING AND OBSOLESCENCE ASSESSMENT ............................................... 6-1

Aging Effects and Mechanisms Review (Aging Matrix).............................................. 6-1

Expected Lifetimes of Feedwater Heaters................................................................. 6-6

Technical Obsolescence ........................................................................................... 6-6

Expected Lifetimes for Preventive Replacement or Redesign ................................... 6-8

7 GENERIC ALTERNATIVE LCM PLANS ............................................................................. 7-1

7.1.3 Other Plant Strategies: (Power Uprate, Early Decommissioning, >60

Examples of Suitable Alternative LCM Plans............................................................. 7-3

Hypothetical Illustration of an LCM Planning Alternative for Feedwater Heaters........ 7-4

Alternative A Base Case................................................................................ 7-4

Alternative B Step Increase in NDE Examinations of the FW Heaters ........... 7-5

Alternative C Major Maintenance (Tube Rebundle, etc.)................................ 7-5

Alternative D FW Heater Replacement .......................................................... 7-5

Composite Evaluation....................................................................................... 7-6

Additional Evaluation of FW Heater Options.............................................................. 7-7

8 GUIDANCE FOR ESTIMATING FUTURE FAILURE RATES .............................................. 8-1

Tube Vibration, Erosion, Cracking, and Corrosion

Shell Erosion and Corrosion

Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint Problems

Drains Cooler Zone Erosion

Impingement Plate (baffle, shield, drain inlet, etc.) Erosion