Guideline For The Evaluation and Treatment of Corrosion and Fouling in Fire Protection Systems

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

Guideline for the Evaluation and
Treatment of Corrosion and Fouling
in Fire Protection Systems

TR-109633
Final Report, March 1999
EPRI Project Manager
T. Eckert
Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in
accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7
of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations. As a result of this publication, this
report is subject to only copyright protection and does not require any license
agreement from EPRI. This notice supersedes the export control restrictions
and any proprietary licensed material notices embedded in the document prior
to publication
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS PACKAGE 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) NAMED
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 PACKAGE, 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 PACKAGE 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
PACKAGE OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN
THIS PACKAGE.
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS PACKAGE
R.W. Lutey & Associates

ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this package should be directed to the EPRI Distribution Center, 207 Coggins Drive, P.O.
Box 23205, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523, (925) 934-4212.
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
EPRI. POWERING PROGRESS is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright 1999 EPRI, Inc. All rights reserved.
iii
CITATION
This report was prepared by
R. W. Lutey & Associates
6848 Stornaway Drive
Memphis, TN 38119
Principal Investigator
Dr. Richard W. Lutey
This report describes research sponsored by EPRI. The report is a corporate document
that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Treatment of Corrosion and Fouling in Fire Protection
Systems, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1999. Report TR-109633.
v
REPORT SUMMARY
This guideline document addresses the methods to control and mitigate corrosion,
fouling, and microbiological growth in water-related fire protection systems (FPSs).
Background
The reliability of fire protection systems (FPSs) is most important to prevention and
mitigation of the consequences of fires. FPSs are subject to degradation through various
types of fouling and corrosion, which can impact performance and service life.
Corrosion degradation can result in material replacements and major maintenance
costs. The causes of corrosion degradation of the FPS have not been studied as
extensively and is not as well reported in the literature as other water-filled systems.
Fouling, either associated with microbiological growth or related to sedimentation, can
impact the function of individual components, such as valves and sprinklers, or can
result in the failure of the FPS in the prevention or mitigation of the consequences of
fires.
Objectives
To provide engineers and chemists with guidance for maintaining optimum system
integrity and performance in Fire Protection Systems.
Approach
The EPRI Plant Support Engineering Program established the Corrosion and Fouling in
Fire Protection Systems Task Group, which met five times in 1998. The Task Group
identified the basic issues concerning wetted fire protection systems, reviewed various
utility fire water corrosion and fouling programs, and compiled the best practices to
develop this document.
Key Points
Water and foam-water fire protection system designs are described.
vi
The capability of these systems to carry out their function is impacted by mechanical
limitations, plugging and fouling, and various forms of corrosion.
Assessment of the fire protection systems condition requires comprehensive
inspections, microbiological and chemical surveys, and a complete commitment to
routine preventive maintenance.
Mitigation treatment programs have generally proven to be more expensive than
control treatment programs.
Monitoring techniques to assess the performance of corrosion and fouling control
measures are provided.
Industry consensus was achieved.
Keywords
Fire protection
Corrosion protection
Fouling
Microbial corrosion
Chemistry
Interest Categories
Corrosion control
Plant support engineering
Service water systems
Fire protection
Chemistry
EPRI Licensed Material
vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following individuals were ongoing members of Plant Support Engineering's
Corrosion and Fouling in Fire Protection Systems Task Group. As such, they have made
significant contributions to the development of this guide by attending the majority of
the task group meetings, reviewing/commenting on various drafts, and writing
portions of the document.
David Piller, Utility Chairman PECO Nuclear
Ed Dressler American Nuclear Insurers
Paul Giaccaglia American Nuclear Insurers
Henry W. Riley Jr. P.E. Arizona Public Service Co.
John Carroll Betz Laboratories, Inc.
Raymond M. Post Betz Laboratories, Inc.
Bennett P. Boffardi Boffardi & Associates
Richard E. McKee Calgon Corporation
Chuck Bowman Chuck Bowman Associates
Bill Burke Entergy Services, Inc.
Russ Green GPU Nuclear, Inc.
Eric Hale Nalco Chemical Co.
John Kristensen New York Power Authority
Jeffrey E. Peters Northeast Utilities
Chris Dahms Nuclear Electric Insurance, Ltd.
Wayne Sohlman Nuclear Electric Insurance, Ltd.
K. Anthony Selby Puckorius & Associates, Inc.
Dave Chiang Southern California Edison Co.
Mickey Perry Southern Nuclear Operating Co.
George J. Licina Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
E. S. Chandrasekaran Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Wayne C. Micheletti Wayne C. Micheletti, Inc.
ix
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Background - Fire Protection Systems in Power Plants................................................ 1-1
1.2 Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 1-2
1.5 Management Responsibility and Program Ownership .................................................. 1-3
2 DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Purpose of Fire Protection Systems - Service/Performance Requirements.................. 2-1
2.2 Fire Protection System Designs.................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.1 Sprinkler Systems .................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2.1.1 Variations of Sprinkler System Design ............................................................ 2-1
2.2.2 Standpipe Systems ................................................................................................ 2-2
2.2.2.1 Variations in Standpipe System Design .......................................................... 2-3
2.2.3 Water Spray Fixed Systems................................................................................... 2-3
2.2.4 Foam-Water Sprinkler Systems.............................................................................. 2-3
2.2.5 Foam-Water Spray Systems .................................................................................. 2-4
2.3 Fire Protection System Materials of Construction ......................................................... 2-4
2.3.1 Piping..................................................................................................................... 2-4
2.3.2 Water Supply.......................................................................................................... 2-6
2.3.3 Pumps (Including Jockey Pumps) and Sprinkler Heads......................................... 2-6
2.3.4 Preaction, Deluge, and Fixed Foam Systems ........................................................ 2-6
2.4 System Operation Variations ........................................................................................ 2-7
2.4.1 Operation Procedures............................................................................................ 2-7
2.4.2 System Inspection.................................................................................................. 2-7
2.4.3 Preventive and Mandatory Maintenance Programs ............................................... 2-7
x
2.4.4 Corrective Action.................................................................................................... 2-7
2.4.5 System Testing Programs...................................................................................... 2-7
2.4.6 Impairment Procedures.......................................................................................... 2-8
2.4.7 Maintenance of Records and Reports.................................................................... 2-8
3 PROBLEMS ........................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1 Problems Impacting Fire Protection Systems ............................................................... 3-1
3.2 Mechanical/Physical Limitations ................................................................................... 3-1
3.3 Plugging and Fouling.................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2.1 Microbiological Fouling........................................................................................... 3-2
3.3.2 Macrofouling........................................................................................................... 3-2
3.3.3 Sedimentation........................................................................................................ 3-3
3.3.4 Corrosion Products ................................................................................................ 3-3
3.4 Corrosion ...................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.4.1 MIC ........................................................................................................................ 3-4
3.4.2 Under Deposit Corrosion........................................................................................ 3-5
3.4.3 Crevice Corrosion................................................................................................... 3-6
3.4.4 Galvanic Corrosion................................................................................................. 3-6
3.4.5 Other ...................................................................................................................... 3-8
4 ASSESSMENT.................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Assessment Procedures............................................................................................... 4-2
4.2.1 Visual Appearance................................................................................................. 4-4
4.2.2 Microbiological Data............................................................................................... 4-5
4.2.3 Chemical Analysis Data ......................................................................................... 4-5
4.2.4 Physical/Operating Data ........................................................................................ 4-6
4.3 Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance .......................................................................... 4-6
4.4 Training......................................................................................................................... 4-8
5 CONTROL AND MITIGATION............................................................................................. 5-1
5.1 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Determining Treatment Needs to Control Corrosion and Fouling ................................. 5-1
5.2.1 Materials and Design ............................................................................................. 5-2
5.2.2 Makeup Water Quality and Source ........................................................................ 5-2
xi
5.2.3 Operating Considerations ...................................................................................... 5-3
5.2.4 System Condition................................................................................................... 5-3
5.2.5 Previous Treatment Programs ............................................................................... 5-3
5.2.6 Compatibility........................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.7 Impact on Other Plant Systems.............................................................................. 5-5
5.3 Mitigation ...................................................................................................................... 5-5
5.3.1 Physical/Mechanical Cleaning................................................................................ 5-6
5.3.2 Chemical Cleaning Methods .................................................................................. 5-6
5.3.2.1 Fill and Soak Chemical Cleaning for Biofouling............................................... 5-7
5.3.2.2 Shut-Down Circulating Chemical Cleaning...................................................... 5-7
5.3.3 Aggressive and Non-Aggressive Chemical Cleaning ............................................. 5-7
5.3.3.1 Aggressive Chemical Cleaning........................................................................ 5-8
5.3.3.2 Non-Aggressive Cleaning................................................................................ 5-9
5.4 Chemicals Used for Chemical Cleaning...................................................................... 5-10
5.4.1 Aggressive Chemicals.......................................................................................... 5-10
5.4.2 Non-Aggressive Chemicals .................................................................................. 5-13
5.5 Chemicals Used for Corrosion Control ........................................................................ 5-14
5.5.1 Ferrous Alloy Corrosion Inhibitors ........................................................................ 5-15
5.5.2 Copper Alloy Corrosion Inhibitors......................................................................... 5-16
5.5.3 Other Inhibitors..................................................................................................... 5-16
5.6 Chemical Used for Micro/Macrobiological Control....................................................... 5-17
5.6.1 Chemical Used as Biocides/Biostats.................................................................... 5-18
5.6.1.1 Oxidizing Chemicals...................................................................................... 5-18
5.6.1.2 Non-Oxidizing Biocides/Biostats.................................................................... 5-21
5.6.2 Non-Toxic Control Chemicals............................................................................... 5-24
5.6.3 Non-Chemical Control Options............................................................................. 5-25
5.7 Fouling Control ........................................................................................................... 5-26
5.7.1 Chemicals Used for Fouling Control ..................................................................... 5-27
5.7.2 Non-Chemical Means of Fouling Control.............................................................. 5-27
5.8 Non-Chemical Corrosion Control ................................................................................ 5-28
5.8.1 Non-Chemical Corrosion Control of Tanks and Buried Pipe ................................ 5-28
5.8.1.1 Coatings........................................................................................................ 5-28
5.8.1.2 Cathodic Protection....................................................................................... 5-29
5.8.2 Accumulation of Foreign Materials on Sprinklers ................................................. 5-31
xii
5.8.3 Dry Piping in Dry Pipe Sprinkler, Deluge, and Preaction Systems ....................... 5-31
5.8.4 Foam-Water Systems........................................................................................... 5-31
5.8.5 Other Non-Chemical Corrosion Control Procedures ............................................ 5-32
5.9 Regulatory and Registration Considerations............................................................... 5-32
6 PERFORMANCE MONITORING......................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Corrosion Monitoring Techniques ................................................................................. 6-3
6.2.1 Corrosion Coupons ................................................................................................ 6-3
6.2.2 Test Spool Pipe Segments..................................................................................... 6-4
6.2.3 Electrochemical Techniques .................................................................................. 6-5
6.3 Fouling Monitoring Techniques..................................................................................... 6-5
6.4 Microbiological Growth Monitoring Techniques............................................................. 6-7
6.4.1 Planktonic Microbiological Analysis........................................................................ 6-7
6.4.2 Microbiological Analysis of Sessile Colonization .................................................... 6-8
6.4.3 Tuberculation Analysis ........................................................................................... 6-9
6.5 Other Performance Monitoring Techniques ................................................................ 6-10
6.5.1 Internal Visual Inspection.................................................................................... 6-10
6.5.2 Nondestructive Evaluations.................................................................................. 6-10
6.6 Corrosion or Fouling/Leaks Performance Tabulation.................................................. 6-11
6.7 Chemical Analysis Performance Monitoring Criteria ................................................... 6-11
6.8 Data Trending............................................................................................................. 6-12
7 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 7-1
8 APPENDIX A: MICROBIOLOGICAL SURVEY PROCEDURES......................................... 8-1
I. Background...................................................................................................................... 8-1
On-Site Visual Examination of Accessible Components ................................................. 8-1
On-Site Microscopic Examination.................................................................................... 8-2
On-Site Microbiological Culture Tests ............................................................................. 8-2
Deposits and Metallurgical Analysis................................................................................ 8-3
Water Chemistry Analysis ............................................................................................... 8-4
Report of Observations and Results ............................................................................... 8-4
II. Description of Test Procedures....................................................................................... 8-4
Microscope...................................................................................................................... 8-4
xiii
Water Suspension Slide Mount Technique ..................................................................... 8-7
Hanging-Drop Slide Mounts ............................................................................................ 8-8
Staining Procedures...................................................................................................... 8-10
Differential Stains for Endospores................................................................................. 8-12
Dry-Mount Films............................................................................................................ 8-14
Semi-Permanent Slide Mounts...................................................................................... 8-15
Swab Sampling for Culturing from Deposits and Surfaces............................................ 8-16
Isolation and Characterization of Microflora from Water Samples................................. 8-22
Plate Count Method for the Enumeration of Microorganisms........................................ 8-24
Detection of Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria ........................................................................ 8-28
Microscopic Examination of Microbiological and Non-Microbiological Deposits ............ 8-30
Membrane Filter Technique for Detection and Characterization of Microflora............... 8-31
Procedures for Collecting and Transporting Water Samples......................................... 8-35
Procedures for Obtaining and Transporting Pipe Samples ........................................... 8-35
Resources for Materials Used to Perform a Microbiological Survey of an FPS............. 8-36
9 APPENDIX B: INDUSTRY EXPERIENCES ........................................................................ 9-1
1.1 Fire Protection Raw Water System Corrosion and MIC Problems and
Effectiveness of Chemical Treatment Programs................................................................. 9-1
Piping Description ........................................................................................................... 9-1
Current Maintenance and Surveillance Program............................................................. 9-1
Pipe Replacement History............................................................................................... 9-2
Chemical Treatment Program......................................................................................... 9-2
Fire Protection Pipe Inspections...................................................................................... 9-2
Results of Fire Protection Pipe Inspection ...................................................................... 9-3
Review of Flow Discharge Tests ................................................................................. 9-3
Visual Pipe Inspections with Strainer Baskets/Valves Removed................................. 9-3
Visual Inspections during Pipe Repair/Replacement................................................... 9-3
Ultrasonic Testing........................................................................................................ 9-3
Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 9-3
Short-Term Actions ..................................................................................................... 9-4
Long-Term Actions...................................................................................................... 9-4
2.1 Corrosion Issues as Related to the Philosophy Of Fire Service System Use.............. 9-16
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 9-16
xiv
3.1 MIC Tracking Software ............................................................................................... 9-20
4.1 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Fire Protection System Corrosion and
Fouling Treatment............................................................................................................. 9-21
4.2 Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 9-21
4.3 Introduction of PVNGS Fire Protection Water System................................................ 9-22
4.4 Problems Impacting the PVNGS Fire Protection Water System................................. 9-24
4.5 System Evaluation and Assessment........................................................................... 9-26
4.6 PVNGS Fire Protection Water System Control and Mitigation.................................... 9-28
4.7 Performance Monitoring and System Enhancements................................................. 9-31
10 APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY............................................................................................. 10-1
11 APPENDIX D: BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................................................................... 11-1
Reference Books and Manuals......................................................................................... 11-1
Information Industry Surveys ............................................................................................ 11-2
MIC - Microbiology ............................................................................................................ 11-2
MIC - Detection................................................................................................................. 11-3
MIC - Control and Mitigation ............................................................................................. 11-3
MIC - Case Histories......................................................................................................... 11-5
Macrofouling ..................................................................................................................... 11-6
FPS - Design and Materials .............................................................................................. 11-6
FPS - Inspection, Testing, Maintenance........................................................................... 11-7
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 9-1 HPFP Main Headers Inside the Plant (Wet System).............................................. 9-6
Figure 9-2 Proposed Potable Water HPFP System.............................................................. 9-16
Figure 9-3 Discharge Piping Downstream of Valve FS-P-2 .................................................. 9-18
Figure 9-4 Elbow Removed from Dead Leg.......................................................................... 9-19
Figure 9-5 Piping Removed from Dead Leg.......................................................................... 9-19
xvii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Materials of Construction........................................................................................ 2-5
Table 4-1 Fire Water System Assessment Form .................................................................... 4-3
Table 5-1 Chemical Names and Abbreviations..................................................................... 5-11
Table 5-2 Mineral Deposits vs. Solvents............................................................................... 5-11
Table 5-3 Materials vs. Solvents - Compatibility ................................................................... 5-12
Table 5-4 Temperature Limitations ....................................................................................... 5-13
Table 5-5 Inhibitors Used for Corrosion Control with Ferrous Alloys..................................... 5-15
Table 5-6 Oxidizing Chemicals for Microbiological Control ................................................... 5-18
Table 5-7 Non-Oxidizing Biocides......................................................................................... 5-19
Table 5-8 Chemicals for Macrobiological Control.................................................................. 5-20
Table 5-9 Cathodic Protection Criteria for Buried Pipe ......................................................... 5-30
Table 8-1 Optical Specifications ............................................................................................. 8-5
Table 9-1 Pipe Replacement Recommendations.................................................................... 9-7
Table 9-2 Fire Protection Pipe Replacement Cost Estimate................................................... 9-9
Table 9-3 Unit Rate for Pipe Replacement ........................................................................... 9-11
Table 9-4 Options for Pipe Replacement .............................................................................. 9-12
Table 9-5 Cost Benefit Analysis: 20-Year Remaining Plant Life (1998 Dollars).................... 9-13
Table 9-6 Cost Benefit Analysis: 30-Year Remaining Plant Life (1998 Dollars).................... 9-14
Table 9-7 Replace Piping On An As-Needed Basis.............................................................. 9-15
Table 9-8 PVNGS Well Water Analysis - Fire Protection System......................................... 9-25
Table 9-9 Typical PVNGS Water Sample and Corrosion Coupon Analysis .......................... 9-30
1-1
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background - Fire Protection Systems in Power Plants
This document addresses the methods to control and mitigate corrosion, fouling, and
microbiological growth in water-related fire protection systems (FPSs).
The reliability of FPSs is most important in preventing and mitigating the consequences
of fires. FPSs are subject to degradation through various types of fouling and corrosion,
which can impact performance and service life. Corrosion degradation can result in
material replacements and major maintenance costs. The causes of corrosion
degradation of FPSs have not been studied as extensively and are not as well reported
in the literature as other water-filled systems.
Fouling, either associated with microbiological growth or related to sedimentation, can
impact the function of individual components such as valves and sprinklers, or can
result in the failure of the FPS in preventing and mitigating the consequences of fires.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide FPS engineers and chemists with guidance
for maintaining optimum FPS integrity and performance . The guidance here
addresses:
Establishing site-specific programs
Understanding the technological basis for treatment programs
Establishing monitoring methods and frequencies
Outlining troubleshooting approaches and corrective actions
Being aware of environmental concerns
Providing industry experience
Introduction
1-2
While this guideline provides a great deal of technical information on chemical
treatment of FPSs, it might not eliminate the need for obtaining expert third-party
assistance.
This guideline was developed for nuclear power plants; however, most of the
information in the document is also applicable to fossil-fueled power plants. They also
have FPSs that are similar in design and have many of the same problems.
1.3 Scope
The scope of this report is to:
Describe system design of FPSs
Provide appropriate definitions
Describe water-related problems in FPSs
Provide a detailed guide to chemical selection
Provide guidance on monitoring a total water treatment program
Provide guidance on evaluating performance
Provide a discussion on nonchemical control methods of corrosion and fouling
This document provides a resource for establishing and maintaining a comprehensive
guideline to deal with corrosion and fouling in water-based FPSs. Sufficient detail is
provided to enable the creation of a comprehensive program or the enhancement of an
existing program.
While the methods and technologies described here are extensive, they are not all-
inclusive. There are existing methods not described in this document and other
methods are being developed that could be applicable.
1.4 Assumptions
The systems discussed in this guideline are limited to FPSs that are at some point in
time associated with water. The guideline does not address steam surface condenser
circulating water systems, or open or raw water cooling water systems, although
the treatment programs might be the same or similar.
Introduction
1-3
It is understood that all corrosion is electrochemical in nature. In this document, the
term electrochemical corrosion is used to describe corrosion with no microbiological
involvement. Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) is used to describe
corrosion where microorganisms are involved.
1.5 Management Responsibility and Program Ownership
It is recognized that a specific program applicable to all plants cannot be defined due to
differences in design, experience, management structure, and operating philosophy.
However, the goal is to minimize corrosion and fouling and to maximize the
availability and operating life of FPSs. To meet this goal, an effective control program is
essential and should be based upon the following:
Clear management support for adequate resources, staff, equipment funding, and
organization designed to maintain system integrity
Recognition of the long-term benefits of, and need for, proper control to avoid or
minimize corrosion degradation of major components
Continuing review of plant and industry experience, research, and revisions to the
program as appropriate
2-1
2
DESCRIPTION
2.1 Purpose of Fire Protection Systems - Service/Performance
Requirements
The purpose of all fire protection systems, regardless of system design, is to provide the
perpetual capability of controlling a fire that could disable or destroy individual
components or an entire area requiring protection. The performance requirements,
without exception, must be done in a rapid, complete, and safe manner under worst-
case scenario conditions. Water-based systems are used when the fire resulting from
the combustion of local materials can be extinguished by water or foam-water within
the specifications of these performance requirements. The types of system design
discussed include, but are not limited to, sprinkler, standpipe and hose, fixed water
spray, and foam-water systems.
2.2 Fire Protection System Designs
2.2.1 Sprinkler Systems
A sprinkler system for fire protection purposes is an integrated system of underground
and overhead piping including sprinklers and one or more automatic water supplies.
The portion of the sprinkler system above ground is a network of piping that is
installed in the area requiring protection, usually overhead and to which sprinklers are
attached in a systematic pattern. The valves controlling each system riser are located in
the system riser or its supply piping. Each sprinkler system riser includes a device for
actuating an alarm when the system is in operation. The operation of the system is
usually activated by heat from a fire and subsequently discharges water over the fire
area.
2.2.1.1 Variations of Sprinkler System Design
Wet pipe systems employ automatic sprinklers attached to a piping system containing
water and connected to a water supply so that water discharges immediately from
sprinklers opened by heat from a fire.
Description
2-2
Antifreeze systems employ automatic sprinklers attached to a piping system containing
an antifreeze solution and connected to a water supply. The antifreeze solution is
discharged, followed by water, immediately upon operation of the sprinklers opened
by heat from a fire.
Dry pipe systems employ automatic sprinklers attached to a piping system containing air
or nitrogen under pressure. The release of the pressure, as from the opening of a
sprinkler, allows the water pressure to open a valve known as a dry pipe valve. When
this valve opens, water flows into the piping and out the open sprinklers.
Deluge systems employ open sprinklers attached to a piping system and connected to a
water supply through a valve that is opened by the operation of a detection system
located in the area to be protected. When this valve opens, water flows into the piping
system and discharges in large volumes from all attached sprinklers
Preaction systems employ automatic sprinklers attached to a piping system containing
air that might or might not be under pressure. A supplemental detection system that
actuates the supply valve is installed in the same area as the sprinklers. When this valve
opens, water flows into the piping system to be discharged from any sprinklers that are
open.
Combined dry pipe-preaction systems employ automatic sprinklers attached to a piping
system containing air under pressure, with a supplemental detection system located in
the same area as the sprinklers. Operation of the detection system actuates tripping
devices that open dry pipe valves simultaneously, without a loss of air pressure in the
system. Operation of the detection system also opens listed air exhaust valves at the
end of the feed main, which usually precedes the opening of the sprinklers. The
detection system also serves as an automatic fire alarm system.
2.2.2 Standpipe Systems
Standpipe systems are designed to provide a source of water for hose connections used
to manually extinguish fires. They consist of an arrangement of piping, valves, hose
connections, and allied equipment installed at or near the site to be protected. The hose
connections are located so that water can be discharged in streams or spray patterns
through the attached hose and nozzles, thus protecting a structure and its occupants
and contents. This is accomplished by connections to water supply systems with
maintained water pressures or to other equipment such as pumps, tanks, and other
items necessary to provide an adequate volume and water pressure to the hose
connections. Standpipe systems do not typically employ automatic devices that actuate
water discharge nor do they discharge through a sprinkler system.
Description
2-3
2.2.2.1 Variations in Standpipe System Design
Wet standpipe systems are designed to have the supply valve open and the water
pressure maintained at all times. Water is discharged from the system to the fire by
manual operation of the hose connection valve.
Dry standpipe systems may employ the following options:
Includes devices to admit water to the system automatically by opening a hose
valve.
Admits water to the system through manual operation of a remote control device
that opens valves at each hose station.
Has no permanent water supply. A filled standpipe having a small water supply
connection to keep piping filled by requiring water to be pumped into the system is
considered to be a dry standpipe.
Combined standpipe and sprinkler systems are systems where the water supply piping
services both 2 -in. (63.5-mm) connections for fire department use and outlets for
automatic sprinklers.
2.2.3 Water Spray Fixed Systems
Water spray fixed systems are special fixed piping systems located at specific localized
sites, such as oil storage sites or turbine pumps. These systems are designed to protect
individual components or limited areas. The piping is connected to a reliable water
supply and is equipped with water spray nozzles, rather than sprinklers, for specific
water discharge and distribution over the surface area to be protected. The piping is
connected to the water supply through an automatically or manually actuated valve
that initiates the flow of water. A control valve can be actuated by automatic detection
equipment that is installed in the same area as the spray nozzles.
2.2.4 Foam-Water Sprinkler Systems
Foam-water sprinkler systems consist of piping that is connected to both a source of
liquid foam concentrate and a water supply and are equipped with appropriate
discharge sprinklers that distribute the foam-water over the area to be protected. The
piping system is connected to the water supply through a control valve that is usually
actuated by an automatic detection device installed at the site to be protected. When
this valve opens, water flows into the piping system and foam concentrate is injected
into the water. The resulting foam solution flowing through the discharge device
generates and distributes the foam. Upon exhaustion of the foam concentrate supply,
Description
2-4
water discharge continues until shut off. Systems are also designed for discharge of
water first, followed by discharge of foam for a specific period. Existing deluge
sprinkler systems that have been converted to the use of aqueous film-forming foam are
classified as foam-water sprinkler systems.
2.2.5 Foam-Water Spray Systems
Foam-water spray systems correspond in system design and operations to those for the
foam-water sprinkler systems described in Section 2.2.4, except that discharge is
through spray systems rather than sprinklers.
2.3 Fire Protection System Materials of Construction
2.3.1 Piping
The materials used for piping depend more on the service requirements than on the
type of system or system design. The size or flow capacities and pipe wall thickness are
system-specific and also depend on the service requirements of the system. The
composition of materials and methods of fabrication of the piping, for example, drawn
pipe, seam-welded pipe, seamless pipe, cast pipe, etc., are system-specific and must
meet appropriate manufacturing standards and specifications. External and internal
coatings are commonly used on piping. These include numerous compositions ranging
from cement to coal tar epoxy linings and coatings on various metal alloys.
The fabrication/installation standards are dependent on the service requirements of the
system. These standards include fabrication/installation procedures, such as butt vs.
socket field welds; threaded, flanged vs. welded unions and elbows; underground vs.
overhead installation. The standards and specifications are discussed extensively in
other publications such as those produced by the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA). A number of individual industries including the nuclear/fossil fuel power
generating industry have their own specific standards and specifications for materials
of construction and fabrication procedures used with fire protection systems.
Taking into account the statements made above concerning standards and
specifications, a broad generalization regarding materials used for piping in fire
protection systems can be made. The wet and dry pipe listed includes headers,
standpipes, fixed foam lines, laterals, and branches.
Description
2-5
Table 2-1
Materials of Construction
Underground Mains Interior Mains Wet Pipe Dry Pipe
Cement-lined ductile Carbon steel (CS) CS CS
Cement-lined CS Galvanized CS Galvanized CS Galvanized CS
Cement-lined cast iron Black iron
CS specialty-coated
Gray cast iron
Various types of cast iron are widely used in FPSs, especially for buried piping and
certain mechanical parts. Cast iron is an alloy of iron, silica, and carbon. The carbon
concentration is between 1.74.5%, most of which is present in insoluble form, (for
example, graphite flakes or nodules). This material is normally called unalloyed cast
iron and exists in these types:
Unalloyed gray iron (is soft but still brittle)
Ductile, malleable cast iron
Nodular or ductile cast iron (has the most superior mechanical properties and
corrosion resistance)
In addition, there are a number of alloyed cast irons, most of which have improved
corrosion resistance and substantially modified mechanical and physical properties
suited for use in buried FPS piping. These include:
Gray cast iron
Malleable cast iron
Ductile or nodular cast iron
High-silicon cast iron
Nickel cast iron
Gray cast iron, ductile cast iron, and cement lined ductile and cast iron pipe are the
materials most often used in fire protection underground piping applications.
Description
2-6
2.3.2 Water Supply
Water supply facilities are a part of FPS system design to insure that an adequate
supply of makeup water is available to the fire protection system. The type and volume
of the water storage reservoir is usually system specific. Water storage facilities can be
elevated water towers, large ground-level tanks, covered or uncovered man-made
reservoirs, or open natural containments of raw surface water. The latter may be a
shared water supply to other systems, for example, service water system.
The designated water storage tank found in most systems can be a large welded-plate
carbon steel enclosed/covered container. Volumes range from 50,000500,000 gallons
(1891,893 kiloliters), but can be much smaller or larger depending on the primary
source of the FPS water. Most carbon steel tanks have a corrosion-resistant coating
applied on the interior surfaces. However, some carbon steel water storage tanks are
not coated. Some carbon steel tanks are equipped with cathodic corrosion protection
(CP) devices.
2.3.3 Pumps (Including Jockey Pumps) and Sprinkler Heads
The pumps and sprinkler heads are components that obviously must be in as-new
condition indefinitely. In wet systems, many of these components are in contact with
stagnant water at all times, except during performance testing and inspections. Typical
materials of construction of these components include brass or bronze alloys. The bell
housing of the pumps may be cast iron or carbon steel and the pump shafts fabricated
from stainless steel. Some parts of the sprinkler heads may be fabricated from austinetic
stainless steel or chrome-plated steel. It should be noted that materials of construction
and system design in FPSs provide numerous conditions for galvanic couples and
subsequent galvanic corrosion.
2.3.4 Preaction, Deluge, and Fixed Foam Systems
The alternative system designs to wet and dry sprinkler systems and standpipe systems
are included in this category. Materials of construction are often the same. The piping
systems are those listed earlier. Storage tanks are typically the same design and
constructed with the same materials. The pumps and water delivery systems use the
same materials of construction.
Description
2-7
2.4 System Operation Variations
2.4.1 Operation Procedures
The operation procedures of a specific FPS can vary considerably from one plant to
another. Two systems can look identical but not function or be operated the same.
Many of the variations are related to system design. For example, a wet pipe sprinkler
system with a primary water storage tank may be operated differently than one
without a storage tank. The performance testing would likely be done at a different
frequency in each situation. The diversion of water from the FPS to other supplemental
uses may be more likely with a system that has a storage tank.
2.4.2 System Inspection
System inspection programs vary, both in the schedule for inspections and what is to be
inspected. The inspection procedures must meet certain specifications as outlined by
the design standards set for each system. A routine inspection protocol must be
established and coordinated with all other pertinent system operations.
2.4.3 Preventive and Mandatory Maintenance Programs
Preventive and mandatory maintenance programs vary considerably from system to
system. The maintenance programs depend to a large extent on the actual physical
condition of the system, how long the system has been in place, and whether there have
been substantial system modifications.
2.4.4 Corrective Action
When inspection indicates a need for corrective action, the action to be taken varies
with each FPS.
2.4.5 System Testing Programs
System testing programs vary. The variations depend on the need for specific tests and
often on the availability of testing equipment and testing protocol. Chemical and
microbiological testing is done in many systems where corrosion, fouling, and
microbiological problems are potentially or actually occurring. Other tests should
include, but not be limited to, flow rates, drain functions, pump tests, valve functions,
sprinkler functions, pressure differentials, and trip tests of dry pipe, deluge, and
preaction valve functions.
Description
2-8
2.4.6 Impairment Procedures
Impairment procedures, whether for an emergency impairment or a preplanned
impairment program, varyparticularly when they involve unscheduled outage time.
2.4.7 Maintenance of Records and Reports
The maintenance of records and reports varies but should include, but not be limited
to, all inspections, performance tests, maintenance data, and chemical/microbiological
survey data. Monitoring data should be made part of the records. All records and
reports should be maintained so that they are readily accessible and distributed to the
appropriate plant staff.
3-1
3
PROBLEMS
3.1 Problems Impacting Fire Protection Systems
The dependability of fire protection systems (FPSs) is most important as it relates to
their capability to control and suppress fires. A number of factors (problems) have an
impact on a systems capability to carry out this function as needed. These problems
include (but are not limited to):
Mechanical/physical limitations
Plugging and fouling of the system
Corrosion by several different mechanisms
Therefore, in the case of any emergency or preplanned impairment, it is typically
necessary to take FPSs out of normal operating status. This often requires establishment
of compensatory measures.
3.2 Mechanical/Physical Limitations
Section 2 of this document describes the various FPS designs. Common to each type of
system is the fact that the major portion, if not all of the systemwet or dry, is in a
stagnant or stand-by mode, and the system may be activated into operation at any
moment. The flow design is typically one way, once through. The operation or
performance of the system is dependent on the function of numerous valves and
pumps. The flow rate or delivery of the water is dependent on the function of a vast
interconnected network of piping, both above and below ground level.
However, the most significant limitation is the fact that FPSs are not typically designed
to facilitate routine maintenance cleaning or the purging of objectionable materials that
may have been inadvertently introduced into the system. The system design often does
not facilitate the application of typical water treatment (corrosion control) technologies.
Mechanical problems often go on undetected, especially small losses of water from the
FPS due to cross connections to other systems at lower pressures or through drainage
Problems
3-2
lines. Valves, packing, threaded fittings, and seals are other sources of undetected
water losses from the FPS.
3.3 Plugging and Fouling
Fouling is a broad term used to describe conditions where the presence of foreign
materials interfere with the function of the FPS or a specific component of the FPS.
Components most susceptible to fouling problems include screens and strainers, wetted
monitoring/detection equipment, sprinklers and sprays, and 2.0 inch (5 cm) or less
lateral piping and valves. Fouling is often overlooked as a cause of valve failure.
Fouling can be associated with several different materials, which include:
Microorganisms
Macroorganisms
Sedimentation
Corrosion products
3.2.1 Microbiological Fouling
The uncontrolled growth of microorganisms, especially filamentous and slime-forming
bacteria, results in the formation of a complex organic substance referred to as slime
or biomass. This material consists primarily of substances produced by
microbiological growth, but can include other materials that become entrained or
trapped into the sticky slimy mass. The onset of microbiological fouling can occur
within a very short time, that is, 612 hours, under optimum conditions (detailed in
Section 5).
The microorganisms that are responsible for the production of the biomass are highly
sessile, that is they colonize surfaces readily and are not planktonic (free floating) in the
bulk water. This sessile tendency enables them to produce biomass on surfaces that are
exposed to high-flow shear and frictional forces. The biomass normally cannot be
flushed away from the screens, filters, pipe surfaces, or valve seats. Microbiological
fouling is often associated with other types of fouling and corrosion and is discussed
elsewhere.
3.3.2 Macrofouling
Macrofouling is associated with an accumulation of mollusks and other invertebrate
organisms within the FPS or at the intake of the makeup water. Fresh raw water
sources that include rivers, lakes, and impoundments may provide the potential for
Problems
3-3
macrofouling. The ingress of macrofouling organisms such as the Asian clam (Corbicula
sp.) and the zebra mussel (Dreissena sp.) into the North American surface water sources
has significantly increased the potential for macrofouling.
Screens and coarse filters can remove the large adult macroorganisms; however, they
do not totally remove macrofouling organisms that are in the larval, veliger, or juvenile
growth stages. The stagnant/intermittent and low-flow conditions of the FPS allow
these motile growth stages to settle and, in some cases, actually adhere to the system
surfaces. The occurrence of intermittent flow or the small flow rate due to leaks, etc.
through the FPS headers can supply sufficient oxygen and nutrients for the
larva/veligers/juveniles to grow into reproducing adults within the FPS and
subsequently contribute to extensive macrofouling. The major consequences of
macrofouling are the reduction of flow rates through the FPS and plugging of sprinkler
systems. The provision of nutrients, especially organic nitrogen compounds, for
problem-causing microorganisms is also a major consequence of macrofouling.
3.3.3 Sedimentation
Sedimentation fouling is a result of the settling of suspended materials at stagnant or
low flow sites within the FPS. The potential for fouling by sedimentation is similar to
that associated with macrofouling. It occurs when the makeup water, without adequate
pretreatment, carries material into the system, such as silt, clay, very fine sand, and
other external debris. Problems related to sedimentation are not typically dependent on
the presence of nutrients or specific water chemistry. The primary factor is the presence
of contaminating materials that will settle out from the water phase.
Perhaps at any one time, the amount of contaminating material brought in with the
makeup water is not very significant; however, the process of sedimentation is usually
cumulative. Over a period of time, fouling by sedimentation in systems where there is
no provision for purging these materials from the system, becomes a problem. The
severity of fouling by sedimentation is often intensified when associated with
microbiological fouling.
3.3.4 Corrosion Products
Another significant source of materials that contribute to fouling problems in FPSs is
the corrosion product and tuberculation generated within the system itself. Corrosion
caused by electrochemical and microbiological mechanisms produces substantial
amounts of suspended and deposited materials that can plug strainers, screens, filters,
sprinklers/sprays, monitoring/detection devices, and other devices.
Tuberculation or nodules resulting from the growth of iron-oxidizing bacteria or from
electrochemical corrosion mechanisms can develop to several inches in diameter and
Problems
3-4
height. This constitutes severe fouling that can significantly reduce flow rates through
system piping.
The deposition of corrosion products on system surfaces has a significant impact on
limiting efforts to inhibit the corrosion. Corrosion-inhibitor chemicals are not effective
in systems where the metal surfaces are fouled with corrosion products. System design
and operation of the system often limit programs designed to prevent the
sedimentation of corrosion products or to remove the deposits from the inner surfaces
of the system. In severe cases, isolating part of the system to flush and chemically clean
out the corrosion products may be the only option.
Microbiological fouling and the production/sedimentation of corrosion products are
often associated with each other. Together, the problems of fouling are usually more
severe than if only one of the conditions exists. Deposition of electrochemical corrosion
products is often involved with the mechanisms of microbiologically influenced
corrosion (MIC) in FPSs.
3.4 Corrosion
Several corrosion mechanisms can affect the reliability of FPSs. Each can result in the
need for expensive mitigation programs done to make the FPS available for performing
design functions. Corrosion results in the loss of structural integrity, weld failures,
penetrations through pipe walls, loss of pumping capability, leaking of water or air
pressure, degradation of monitoring/activation devices, and other problems.
Corrosion products contribute to the plugging and fouling of system components.
Corrosion products tend to remain in the FPS because normal flow rates and testing
procedures do not transport the material out of the system. Most FPSs are not designed
to purge corrosion products. Corrosion products, especially tuberculation, can develop
to the extent that flow rate through the system piping is significantly reduced.
Some of the most important corrosion mechanisms that occur in FPS include under
deposit corrosion, crevice corrosion, galvanic corrosion, and MIC. MIC is probably the
most significant type of corrosion in respect to frequency of occurrence and severity.
3.4.1 MIC
Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) is the term used to describe different
corrosion mechanisms that are either induced or influenced by the growth of
microorganisms. The distinction is made on the basis that certain autotrophic bacteria
can actually initiate the electrochemical reactions that establish the anodic site of a
corrosion cell. Other bacteria provide the cathodic site by serving as electron acceptors.
Problems
3-5
In other words, the growth of the bacteria and the initiation or establishment of the
corrosion process is induced by microbiological metabolism.
Many other bacteria may not be directly responsible for the initiation of the corrosion
process. However, as a result of their growth, metabolic by-products are produced that
influence the corrosion process. This usually involves a consortia or mixed microflora
that produces acids or alkaline compounds that alter the pH within isolated local
environs (micro-environments) and consequently increase the aggressiveness of the
water conditions at the corrosion site. The production of sulfides by sulfide producing
bacteria, including sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), has a major influence on the
frequency and severity of corrosion of most materials of construction for FPSs.
One of the most aggressive corrosion conditions in FPSs occurs when oxygen is
suddenly introduced to a stagnant system containing H
2
S or metal sulfides.
Microbiological growth can also influence corrosion by concentrating chlorides,
sulfides, ammonia, and other aggressive ions in crevices and under deposits, and by
producing deposits that create conditions for under deposit/oxygen concentration
gradient corrosion to occur. Microbiological growth by sessile colonization of many
different types of aerobic and anaerobic microflora can influence the frequency and
severity of:
Pitting corrosion
Crevice corrosion
De-alloying corrosion
Galvanic (dissimilar metal couples) corrosion
FPSs are especially susceptible to MIC and the problems related to it. Stagnant and
intermittent flow conditions create optimum environments for the growth of either
aerobic or anaerobic microorganisms that can be involved with a corrosion process.
System design is such that not only do optimum environments exist for MIC to occur,
but also the system design limits the effectiveness of efforts (such as chemical
treatment) made to prevent MIC.
3.4.2 Under Deposit Corrosion
Under deposit corrosion is often encountered in FPSs. This is related to the fact that two
different types of deposits associated with under deposit corrosion are readily formed
in an FPS. The first type is tuberculation formed by either aerobic iron oxidizing
bacteria or by electrochemical corrosion. Bacteria such as Gallionella sp. form tubercles
by oxidizing soluble iron in the bulk water; this soluble iron often exists because of
other corrosion in the system.
Problems
3-6
Tuberculation can also be formed as a result of electrochemical corrosion mechanisms.
The second type of deposit occurs as a result of the sedimentation and fouling
discussed earlier. Corrosion occurring under these deposits is a result of the oxygen
concentration gradient that may exist between the surface of the base metal and the
bulk water. The deposit functions as a barrier preventing oxygen diffusion from the
bulk water to the metal surface, creating a corrosion cell. The driving forces for under
deposit corrosion to occur in an FPS are the presence of O
2
in the bulk water and the
presence of the deposit barrier on the metal surface. Therefore, to prevent under
deposit corrosion, it is necessary to minimize or eliminate the oxygen concentration in
the bulk water and to prevent the formation of the deposits.
3.4.3 Crevice Corrosion
Crevice corrosion is often included in the definition and discussion of under deposit
corrosion. However, a distinction is made here because a barrier deposit and an O
2
concentration gradient may not be factors in the corrosion mechanism. Crevice
corrosion occurs in FPSs as a result of the concentration of aggressive chemical
compounds or ions in a very localized site, such as a crevice or crack in the base metal.
These materials include:
Sulfide ions
Metals sulfides
Chlorides
Organic/mineral acids
Alkaline nitrogen compounds, such as ammonia and other primary amines
The localized crevice sites most often exist in FPS as a result of faulty fabrication
procedures, such as poor butt or socket welding and backing rings. Piping not
pickled or passivated during fabrication can be more susceptible to crevice corrosion.
Microbiological fouling and sedimentation also contribute to the existence of crevice-
like corrosion sites. Therefore, to prevent crevice corrosion elimination of faults in the
system, corrective fabrication procedures must be implemented and the system must be
kept free of fouling. Preventing the existence of aggressive compounds and ions in the
system must be implemented as well.
3.4.4 Galvanic Corrosion
Galvanic corrosion is usually a result of the coupling or connecting of components that
are composed of different materials of construction. When two dissimilar materials are
Problems
3-7
connected and exposed to a conductive water solution, the less noble metal becomes
anodic and the other becomes cathodic to produce what is called a galvanic corrosion
cell. The anode deteriorates rapidly while the cathode may actually gain increased
corrosion resistance.
The intensity of the galvanic attack is dependent on the ratio of surface area of the less
noble (that is, carbon steel) and the more noble (that is, copper alloy) materials. If the
anodic area is relatively large compared to the cathodic area, the corrosion rate is
relatively low. With the limited cathodic size, the overall reaction rate is limited by the
number of electrons which can be accepted by the cathode. The opposite situation
(large cathode and small anode) results in the rapid dissolution of the anode. In this
case, the large cathode readily accepts all available electrons from the anodic area.
Galvanic corrosion has also been reported with cast iron and cast iron fittings. Cast iron
contains significant amounts of graphite. As the fitting ages and corrosion of the iron
takes place, the graphite is exposed. Graphite is cathodic when coupled with most
metals including cast iron and carbon steel. The result is corrosion of the iron or steel
adjacent to the graphite.
FPSs have numerous sites for potential attachment of dissimilar materials. This
normally occurs in fire protection piping where coupling exists between brass or
bronze components of the system, such as valves or sprinkler heads with iron or carbon
steel piping or a copper sprinkler piping system with iron or carbon steel mains at
welded joints with dissimilar weldment. An example would be the installation of a
bronze or brass valve in contact with carbon steel piping. If the metal contact is not
adequately insulated, corrosion of the carbon steel will occur. Generally, the ratio of
surface area of brass or copper components in contact with carbon steel is not sufficient
to cause major failure of components such as valves, sprinkler heads, pump casings, or
impellers.
The major site of potential galvanic problems is the contact area between piping unions
with dissimilar materials. Large copper piping systems connected to carbon steel mains
or headers are high potential sites and should have dielectric union or other electrically
non-conductive breaks between them. Connections of plastic pipe to carbon steel piping
may include a brass insert in the plastic pipe, which could initiate galvanic corrosion of
the carbon steel.
The most common dissimilar metal couples in FPSs include:
Carbon steel and copper alloy couples
Carbon steel and stainless steel couples
Stainless steel and copper alloy couples
Problems
3-8
3.4.5 Other
Other types of corrosion mechanisms that have been reported to occur in FPSs include
de-alloying, pitting corrosion, and specific corrosion of steel water storage tanks and
reservoirs.
De-alloying corrosion is a process where the integrity or stability of the alloy is degraded.
An example would be the leaching of zinc from a brass component such as an impeller
of a jockey pump. The water chemistry could contribute to the leaching of the zinc and
the subsequent failure of the copper-zinc alloy. Another example would be the
partitioning of the graphite away from the iron component in a cast iron alloy, causing
embrittlement and failure of cast iron piping.
Pitting corrosion is more of a symptom rather than a specific corrosion mechanism.
There are several physical, mechanical, and microbiological circumstances that can
contribute to pitting corrosion. The common factor to all is that the situation exists
where a large cathodic surface area develops in conjunction with a very localized
anodic site. This influences the anodic activity to be in a vertical rather than lateral
direction to the metal surface, which results in pitting.
Natural waters, both potable and non-potable, are often stored in steel tanks or
reservoirs for FPS make-up water supplies. Steel surfaces of tanks submerged in water
are subject to galvanic corrosion. Dissimilar metal corrosion in fire protection storage
tanks can be caused by the copper or stainless steel heater coils and weld seams where
the metallurgy of the weldment differs from the base plate metal.
Many tanks rely on coating systems for corrosion protection. Uncoated or poorly coated
tanks can have heavily corroded surfaces at lower submerged sites while the upper
areas show little corrosion. This may be due to the differential oxygen concentrations in
the water (lower oxygen concentration at lower depths).
Deep vertical gouges several inches or feet (cm or m) long can occur on uncoated
surfaces of steel tanks. This phenomenon is caused by the development of an initial
corrosion pit that generates soft oozing corrosion products. These products slough
down the side of the tank wall, shielding the lower surfaces from oxygen and
rendering them anodic.
When the internal surfaces of tanks are coated with a dielectric material (for example,
vinyl or epoxy), the corrosion activity will be concentrated at the holidays or holes in
the coating. The holidays can result from mechanical damage, ice damage, improper
surface preparation when applying the coating, or merely very small voids in the
coating surface.
Problems
3-9
Another significant area of corrosion concern with storage tanks is the exterior of the
tank bottom due to soil-side corrosion. To deal with this potential problem, it is
necessary to determine the condition of the tank bottom. The current method for
determination is an ultrasonic B-scan inspection of the tank in accordance with API 653,
Deterministic Method. This would require draining the tank and cleaning the tank
bottom.
The above corrosion mechanisms are not unique to FPSs; however, they occur in FPSs
on a limited basis and would occur in other systems given similar situations. There are
few, if any, treatments unique to FPSs for dealing with these types of corrosion. The
answer is to be able to identify the mechanisms and take appropriate measures to
control them or eliminate them from occurring.
4-1
4
ASSESSMENT
4.1 Discussion
Problems impacting FPS can originate soon after the system has been installed and
hydrostatically tested. In some cases problems may have started even earlierduring
installation. This means when considering the specific procedures that must be done to
keep the FPS in optimum operating condition, it is extremely important to know the
actual condition of the system at any given time.
It is necessary to implement an assessment program that is done on a regularly
scheduled basis. If chronic corrosion or other problems exist and a mitigation treatment
program is being done, it may be necessary to do the assessments more frequently.
Assessment of the condition of the system requires comprehensive inspections,
microbiological and chemical surveys, and a complete commitment to routine
preventive maintenance. The value gained from doing the assessment will be reflected
in improved system integrity, and reduced long-term costs.
If the assessment discloses that there are no significant problems, such as those
described in Section 3, consideration must be given to what should be done to keep the
system free of problems. If the assessment indicates that problems may exist, it is
important to consider procedures to identify and treat the problem. Experience has
shown that it is frequently much more practical and efficient to prevent problems than
to mitigate them. The longer the delay in addressing a problem, the more difficult it
may become to successfully mitigate it. Prevention and mitigation actions for problems
in FPSs are discussed in Section 5.
When localized pitting or tuberculation is detected, the condition of the system should
be considered potentially serious. When other data, such as observed accumulations of
sediment and deposits, microbiological fouling, and certain chemical analytical results,
are combined with a suspicious visual appearance, the condition of the system requires
a corrective action plan.
Assessment
4-2
4.2 Assessment Procedures
Assessing the current condition of an FPS is not an easy task. As stated earlier, system
design very often does not provide convenient access to many of the sites where
problems may potentially occur. Assessing whether problems exist and, if they do, how
severe they are involves collection of data from site organizations. Categorizing the
data needed for the assessment helps to identify sites where the data may be obtained.
The importance of documenting and trending the results of these assessments cannot be
understated. Maintaining comprehensive records of previous inspections will greatly
help to categorize the severity and rate of degrading conditions.
The categories of assessment data include:
Complete documentation of the materials of construction of the system
Compilation of records of maintenance and maintenance cleaning
An accurate and current flow diagram or CAD drawing of the system
Documentation and assessment of the effectiveness of prior and current chemical
treatments used in the system, including the makeup water
A review of current and historical monitoring data, which should include corrosion
rates, microbiological survey results, and water chemistry analytical data, is also
necessary for assessment procedures.
The following form provides guidelines for tabulating assessment data and subsequent
review:
Assessment
4-3
Table 4-1
Fire Water System Assessment Form Date _________
Materials of Construction
Piping:
Tanks
Pumps (including impellers)
Chemical Treatment
Biocide/biostat (dosage level and frequency of
addition)
Corrosion inhibitor (dosage level)
Biodispersant (dosage level and frequency of
addition)
Silt/sedimentation dispersant (dosage level)
Other
Current System Data
pH
Hardness Ca
Hardness Total
TSS
Total Cu/dissolved Cu
Total Mn/dissolved Mn
Appearance (color, turbidity, smell)
Anaerobic Bacteria
SRB
Slime-formers
Conductivity
LSI/RSI/PSI
Total Fe/dissolved Fe
Nitrite/nitrate
H2S
Aerobic Bacteria
Acid producers
Mollusks
Assessment
4-4
Make-up Water Data
pH
Hardness Ca
Hardness Total
TSS
Cu T/s Cu
Mn T/s Cu
Anaerobic Bacteria
SRB
Conductivity
Hardness Mg
LSI/RSI/PSI
Total Fe/dissolved Fe
Nitrite/nitrate
H
2
S
Aerobic Bacteria
Acid producers
Health, Safety, & Environment Issues:
HISTORICAL DATA
Ultrasonic Testing (UT):
Radiography (RT):
Physical pipe Inspection:
Prior Chemical Treatment:
Maintenance History
(Include chemical/mechanical cleanings, piping replacements, material
changes)
CAD Drawing (Document applicable information above)
4.2.1 Visual Appearance
Visual appearance is important, but collecting data in this category is usually limited to
when the system is not in service. Opening pipe segments of the FPS for visual
inspection and sample collection should be a routine practice included in every
maintenance outage. Inspections should be made of the critical sites in the system
where MIC, corrosion, fouling, and sedimentation could potentially occur. The
presence of pits, tuberculation, general corrosion, deposits/sediment, and fouling
Assessment
4-5
materials can be detected visually when they exist. Video-boroscopic and photographic
procedures are extremely useful in the collecting and documenting of visual data.
4.2.2 Microbiological Data
Microbiological data are necessary to assess the potential for MIC and fouling in the
system. Access to sampling and microbiological culturing of the bulk water is typically
available. Water samples can be taken from sites such as fire hydrants, drain lines at
fire hose stations, sprinkler systems, and inspection test connections throughout the
plant (for example, close to the supply and at the end of the system).
Access to sampling sessile microbiological populations from internal system surfaces
may be difficult. However, it must be emphasized that these data are very important.
Swab samples (described in Section 8) should be taken every time internal surfaces are
made accessible, for example, during maintenance, inspection, and cleaning
procedures. Sessile sampling can be done on surfaces of side stream biofouling
monitors.
The system requires immediate attention, and the conditions should be considered
potentially serious when sulfides of microbiological origin, tuberculation, and
concentrations of biomass are detected by the microbiological survey. Procedures for
performing microbiological sampling and culturing are described further in Section 8.
4.2.3 Chemical Analysis Data
Chemical analysis data are used both to assess the potential for problems and to detect
the presence of problems. The bulk water samples collected for acquiring
microbiological data can be used for obtaining chemical data. Additional samples from
the makeup water system are also necessary. Obtaining chemical analytical data should
be done on a repeated routine basis. Comparison of the data from samples taken at a
specific frequency indicates if chemical changes are occurring in the system.
Determining how and why these changes are occurring provides more information on
the actual conditions in the system.
Interpretation of these data is made by comparing the chemical characteristics of the
makeup water with the second flush water. If a significant difference appears between
the two samples, it can be assumed that something is happening in the system, perhaps
related to corrosion, MIC, or fouling. A comparison of the chemical characteristics of
the first flush with either the makeup water or the second flush water will help define
what is happening in the system.
Any rise or drop of pH, an increase in soluble iron, loss of alkalinity, presence of
sulfides, increase of suspended or dissolved solids, change in concentration of
Assessment
4-6
dissolved metal ions, for example, Cu, Ca, Mn, Mg, and Fe ions, are indications that
there are problems or potential problems to be addressed.
4.2.4 Physical/Operating Data
Physical/operating data such as the detection of pin hole leaks or through-wall
penetrations at welds or threaded fittings are obvious indications of the existence of
corrosion and that the conditions are severe. However, when leaks are not obvious and
there is no apparent loss of flow rate or system air/water pressure changes, NDE
inspection procedures may be necessary to determine the existence and the severity of
problems. Destructive analyses may also be necessary.
When physical and operating data point to situations that may not be confirmed by
other data assembled for assessing the system conditions, it is necessary to investigate
further to rationalize the differences. When this is completed, it can be assumed that
any problems in the system, if they existed, would be located and the severity assessed.
4.3 Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance
Every system has minimum requirements for routine inspection, testing, and
maintenance. Careful planning and accurate execution are essential to keeping the FPS
in optimum operating condition. Inspection and testing provide much of the system
assessment data discussed in Section 4.2.
System components must be inspected at intervals specified by standards established
for the type and expected service of the system. Inspection and periodic testing
determine what, if any, maintenance actions are required to maintain optimum
operation of water-based FPSs. The inspection standards establish minimum
inspection/testing frequencies, responsibilities, test procedures, and reporting
procedures but do not define precise limits of anomalies where maintenance actions are
required. Inspection frequencies for FPSs should be in accordance with applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards (NFPA), insurance carrier standards,
and plant FPS procedures.
Assessment
4-7
Systems must be tested to verify that the items tested function as intended. Some of the
tests that are significant when assessing the condition of the system with respect to
potential problems include:
Flow-rate tests
Hydrostatic testing
Alarm tests
The standard in the industry for inspection and assessment of condition of steel water
storage tanks and reservoirs is AWWA D101-53. The work requires a cleaned and
drained inspection of the storage tank or reservoir. Generally, the use of a qualified
underwater inspection company is preferable because fire protection water supplies are
not compromised during the inspection process. The underwater inspection can offer
other advantages, which include an assessment of the amount of sedimentation that
exists in the tank at the time of inspection. If significant problems are identified or silt
accumulation is large, the tank or reservoir can then be drained to correct the adverse
conditions.
Maintenance must be done on a routine basis to keep the system components operable
at all times. Making repairs should not be considered as routine or preventive
maintenance. Preventive maintenance is done to eliminate the need for making repairs.
Installation drawings (as-built drawings), original acceptance test records, and device
manufacturers maintenance bulletins should be used to assist in maintaining the
systems and the system components. Preventive maintenance includes such actions as:
Lubricating control valve stems
Adjusting packing glands on valves
Bleeding moisture and condensation from air compressor/air lines
Bleeding dry pipe system auxiliary drains
Cleaning strainers
Corrective maintenance overlaps preventive maintenance under certain conditions.
Corrective maintenance may be considered as an optional action to be done now rather
than later. It includes, but is not limited to, replacing loaded or corroded sprinklers,
replacing missing or loose pipe hangers, replacing valve seats and gaskets, and so on.
Assessment
4-8
4.4 Training
A program for training of all personnel involved with FPS chemistry control should be
established. The training programs should be designed for the level and qualifications
of the personnel being trained. The following elements should be included:
A clear statement of the policy regarding FPS control, including clarification of the
impact of this policy upon the various responsibility areas.
Identification of the impact of poor chemistry control.
Techniques for recognizing unusual conditions and negative trends. Potential
corrective actions and their consequences should be thoroughly discussed.
The interaction of the system operations, engineering, radiation protection,
maintenance, and chemistry departments cannot be overly emphasized in the operation
of the FPS.
5-1
5
CONTROL AND MITIGATION
5.1 Discussion
Control implies that problems or potential problems are currently being addressed, that
is, the conditions of the FPS are controlled to the extent that corrosion or fouling is
minimized. This is the ideal situation because the control procedures are more
manageable and usually more effective than efforts made to mitigate an existing
problem. With the current technology and treatment tools available and given the
opportunity to use these assets, corrosion and fouling in FPSs can be minimized. This
may be an overstatement, but be assured that efforts to prevent problems can be much
more successful and cost effective than efforts made to mitigate problems in most FPSs.
Mitigation implies that operation procedures, including chemical treatment, are done to
at least prevent corrosion and fouling from becoming more severe, or mitigation can
imply that efforts have been made for the corrosion or fouling condition to be
eliminated. Several mitigation options are available. They range from on-line chemical
treatment to replacing FPS components that have experienced damage beyond the
point of repair. The achievement of mitigation objectives is not always as effective or as
cost effective as procedures to prevent problems. Mitigation treatment programs have
generally proven to be more expensive than control treatment programs. Mitigation
options will be discussed later in this section.
5.2 Determining Treatment Needs to Control Corrosion and Fouling
Specific descriptions of problems that require treatment are given in Section 3. In this
section, it is assumed that the root cause has been properly identified using the
guidelines presented and that specific treatment programs are being evaluated.
A treatment program to control corrosion and fouling may involve not only chemical
treatment, but also other operational procedures such as maintenance cleaning, routine
flushing, makeup water pretreatment, and in some cases, system design modifications.
In addition, other considerations such as treatment costs versus component replacement
cost may indicate that preplanned component replacement is the most effective system
management strategy. Environmental compliance constraints may also preclude many
of the chemical treatment strategies outlined in these guidelines. Considerable
Control and Mitigation
5-2
background information is required to develop an effective control program. This
information is discussed in the information that follows.
5.2.1 Materials and Design
Basically, all metallic materials of construction used in fabricating FPSs are susceptible
to corrosion and fouling; however, it is important to know where materials most
susceptible to corrosion and fouling (for example, carbon steel) are located in the
system. This is important because the treatment program must include provisions to
ensure that chemical treatment and cleaning procedures involve these sites. It is also
important to ensure that chemicals used are compatible with the nonmetal materials
used as valve seats, diaphragms in deluge valves, pump seals, gaskets, etc. This issue is
discussed in more detail in Section 5.2.6. of this document.
The method of fabrication of a specific component or piping line may relate to the need
for protection against corrosion and fouling. Information about welds, stress bends,
flange torquing, pipe threading, butt vs. lap joints, etc. are some of the factors about
fabrication methods that can be useful in determining susceptibility to corrosion.
System design can be a major limitation in developing an effective control program. A
thorough understanding of the system flow is necessary to determine how critical areas
can be flushed/cleaned and how chemically treated makeup water can reach the
critical areas. Section 2.2 discusses the numerous design options used with FPSs.
Accurate isometric/piping and instrumentation drawings (P&IDs) help to visualize the
flow of the water through the system during periods of testing and flushing. Dead legs
can be located, and special flushing/draining procedures can be worked out. With an
understanding of the system design, back flushing of local segments of the system and
isolated draining can be accomplished when needed.
5.2.2 Makeup Water Quality and Source
Many FPSs are operated as wet standby systems, ready to be operated when the need
arises. This means that the water used to initially fill the system remains in a stagnant
mode for extended periods of time. The water quality should not contribute to
microbiological growth or to corrosion and fouling. The use of makeup water with low
turbidity or silting potential is also desirable. Fresh water, rather than salt or brackish
water, is more suitable because it generally is less corrosive. Well water, rather than
surface water, is more suitable because it generally has less turbidity and silt.
The use of potable water, when available, is desired because it usually denotes that any
required pretreatment has been done. When potable water sources are not available for
FPS makeup, separate pretreatment of the raw water at the source may be justified as a
5-3
means for preventing corrosion and fouling. Pretreatment may include clarification,
hardness reduction, pH adjustment, and biocide addition.
5.2.3 Operating Considerations
There can be considerable variation in the way FPSs are operated. The procedures
depend in part on the system design and the specifications for performance testing.
Two systems may have been fabricated in the same way and look similar; however, the
methods for preventing corrosion and fouling can differ depending on operating
procedures.
System operation considerations that are related to system design are discussed in
Section 2.4 of this document. Other concerns considered include:
Use of FPS water from the system for other purposes
Undetected leaks (perhaps from buried pipe)
Valve leak-by
5.2.4 System Condition
The condition of the system is a result of what has occurred since the installation and
original hydrostatic testing were done. It is necessary to do a thorough assessment of
the system to determine the presence of existing corrosion, deposits, or sediment on
internal surfaces; the presence of potentially troublesome types of microorganisms; and
the presence of biomass or biofouling. Assessment of system condition is discussed in
detail in Section 4 of this document.
Knowledge of the system condition is necessary to determine whether a specific
mechanical/physical cleaning is required or if a chemical cleaning/mitigation program
must be performed before the control can be implemented.
5.2.5 Previous Treatment Programs
It is important to have information concerning any previous treatment of the FPS. It is
necessary not only to know what the previous treatments were, but also what the
results were. The information concerning previous treatments should include data on
chemical cleanings, maintenance projects, and data from all monitoring programs.
Historical operating data are also important, especially if there were no previous
treatment programs. These data are discussed further in Section 4.2 of this document.
5-4
5.2.6 Compatibility
Compatibility is an issue to be addressed when selecting treatment chemicals to be
used in the corrosion and fouling control and mitigation treatment programs. There are
several compatibility interactions to be concerned about. These are:
Interaction of treatment chemicals and materials of construction. This has
historically not been a major problem with traditional chemicals used in FPSs. The
metallic materials are generally compatible with treatment chemicals when used at
recommended concentrations; however, some of the components have parts made
of non-metallic materials such as rubber, plastic, and elastomeric complexes. Non-
metallic materials are found as valve seats, pump seals, flange gaskets, monitoring
equipment, controllers, and pump and valve diaphragms and historically have not
been a problem. Even if a non-metallic material may be adversely affected by a
concentrated treatment chemical, there may be no effect when the component is
exposed to the chemical at a much lower use concentration. It is advised, however,
to make studies on all chemicals considered for use in the FPS prior to use.
Interaction of each treatment chemical with each of the others. Some biocides may
not be compatible with certain types of dispersants. Some dispersants may not be
compatible with certain corrosion inhibitors. Some non-oxidizing biocides may not
be compatible with an oxygen scavenger. These incompatibilities are discussed in
Sections 5.6 and 5.7.
Interaction of treatment chemicals with chemical characteristic of FPS water. The
primary characteristics of concern are the pH of the water and the presence of
suspended and dissolved solids. For example, the persistence or half-life of certain
non-oxidizing biocides and biostats is often pH dependent. Many of the organo-
sulfur biocides have very short half-lives at a pH above 8.3. Many of the quaternary
amine biocides have cationic charges and, therefore, are not effective (compatible) in
a system with water that contains high levels of anionic-charged suspended solids.
Details regarding these points are discussed further in Sections 5.6 and 5.7.
Interaction of chemicals used when implementing a mitigation treatment program.
A review must be made of cleaning chemicals used when implementing a short
term, aggressive or non-aggressive chemical mitigation treatment program. The
system will be exposed to the cleaning chemicals at relatively high concentration
required to remove the deposits. Several chemical cleaning guidelines have been
published that provide recommendations on the compatibility of various materials
of construction with various chemical cleaning solvents. Details on this subject are
discussed in Section 5.3. However, to ensure that incompatibility does not occur, a
complete chemical analysis of the deposits to be removed should be made.
Laboratory tests to determine the cleaning effectiveness and potential corrosion
effects should be made prior to the actual mitigation treatment.
5-5
Interaction of chemicals with the environment and regulatory limitations. The
environmental compatibility and safety aspects of all chemicals used with a
mitigation treatment program must be assessed. The immediate issue of how the
cleaning chemicals can be handled and disposed of safely without an impact on the
environment must be resolved before the treatment is begun. Disposal of the flush
and rinse water, as well as the neutralizing rinse, must be included as part of the
disposal issue.
5.2.7 Impact on Other Plant Systems
Treatment for the prevention of corrosion and fouling in FPS can have an impact on
other plant systems. In most cases, the FPS is not considered to be part of the plant
service water system (SWS) or the essential service water system (ESW). However,
there can be optional crossflows between the FPS and other SWS/ESW processes. One
such example is when the FPS water is an optional source of water to flood the
containment in an emergency situation or when the FPS is an emergency source of
water for the ESW. If pretreatment of the FPS makeup water is required, it is necessary
to prevent that treatment from having an impact on other uses of that makeup water
source. These are not typical situations, and there may be other situations that are site-
specific. Therefore, when and if there is a chance that the chemical treatment of the FPS
will have an impact on other systems, it must be clearly identified and evaluated.
5.3 Mitigation
When it has been determined that a preventive maintenance control program will not
eliminate the corrosion or fouling condition or prevent it from getting worse, several
decisions must be made as to how to deal with the situation. In most cases, these
decisions lead to a mitigation program. This program would seek to eliminate
corrosion or fouling or at least prevent it from becoming a contributor that would
impact normal plant operation. It must be noted that there are some situations where
mitigation is neither practical nor possible. Under those circumstances, the alternatives
are:
To replace the system (components) and implement a treatment program to prevent
the corrosion or fouling from reoccurring
To simply live with the condition until the first alternative can be implemented
Depending on the system and the severity of the corrosion and fouling, state-of-the-art
technology provides some way to mitigate most existing conditions. Mitigation of the
entire FPS at one time may not be practical. The system should be divided into sectors
and each stage of the mitigation program should be done one sector at a time. This is
discussed further when reviewing the optional mitigation procedures. The procedures
5-6
are typically site-specific, but there are certain guidelines that can be used to increase
the probability of a successful mitigation program.
5.3.1 Physical/Mechanical Cleaning
The first stage of most mitigation programs, no matter what procedure is employed, is
to remove as much of the loose or loosely adhering debris from the system as possible.
The debris typically consists of corrosion products, deposited sludge of various
compositions, and biomass. Removing most of this material is usually done by a water
flushing and draining, repeated as many times as necessary. Water flushing and
draining may be supplemented with air bumping by pulsing high-pressure air through
the pipes back to the main header.
All flushing and draining of lines with less than 2-inches (5.1-cm) ID must be done,
when possible, in a reverse direction from lower ID to higher ID. In those situations
where it is possible to open the lateral lines (ID greater than 2 inches [5.1 cm]) coming
off the main header, a high-pressure flush/hydrolazing should be used. In certain cases
where the ID of the pipe is greater than 4 inches (10.2 cm), pigging can be used.
These techniques can effectively remove loose deposits but may not do a complete job
of cleaning the metal surfaces to which the more tenacious biomasses and corrosion
products adhere. Flushing and draining may be considered as preparation for a more
thorough cleaning procedure. In cases where the corrosion and fouling is not extremely
severe and there is a limited amount of debris associated with it, the flushing and
draining procedure is adequate pretreatment before initiating a preventive/control
treatment program. As with chemical cleaning, these waste sludges must be managed
and disposed of in an environmentally acceptable manner. The impact of
environmental regulations should be considered prior to producing any waste stream.
5.3.2 Chemical Cleaning Methods
Chemical cleaning is the process used to follow up on the mitigation efforts of
physical/mechanical cleaning. There are several options that can be used, depending
on the degree of cleaning required and the amount/type of deposits to be removed.
When it is not possible to circulate cleaning chemicals through the system, the fill and
soak process is used. When circulation is possible, a choice of the type of cleaning
chemicals must be made.
The primary choice is between using aggressive or non-aggressive chemicals.
Aggressive chemical cleaning solutions are designed to dissolve the deposits. The non-
aggressive cleaning solutions are designed to penetrate and disperse the deposits that
are subsequently purged from the system by flushing and draining.
5-7
5.3.2.1 Fill and Soak Chemical Cleaning for Biofouling
A mitigation option that can be considered is using the fill and soak method, treating
one section at a time while the system is in operational condition. This option is
considered only when it is not possible to circulate cleaning chemicals. It is used only
when the deposits are characterized as biofouling deposits, for example, sessile
microbiological colonies or biomass that has entrained some amount of silt and
corrosion products.
A sector of the system is filled with a non-aggressive cleaning solution that is designed
to penetrate and disperse the biomass deposits. The non-aggressive cleaning solution
typically consists of a persistent non-oxidizing biocide, a biodispersant/penetrant, and
an anionic, polyelectrolyte, low molecular weight dispersant. It is allowed to soak in
the pipes for a period of one to seven days. The sector is then drained, flushed, and
filled again with water containing more of the cleaning solution. The process is
repeated until subsequent flush samples show no further removal of deposits.
If practical, perform a visual inspection of accessible sites to determine if cleaning has
been complete. The final step may be to fill and flush as necessary with system water. It
is at this point that any prevention or control treatment chemicals are added to the final
fill water.
There are limitations to this option. One limitation is that the types of deposits that can
be removed are very specifically biomass and not tuberculation or adhering corrosion
products. There must be an adequate means of draining and discharging the soak
water (cleaning solution) to a waste-receiving system that can accept non-aggressive
organic penetrant dispersants and non-oxidizing biocides. Depending on the size of the
entire FPS and whether the entire system is cleaned, the method is time consuming and
labor intensive.
5.3.2.2 Shut-Down Circulating Chemical Cleaning
When the mitigation process is limited to a short duration, an aggressive or a non-
aggressive chemical cleaning solution should be used. The selection of an aggressive or
non-aggressive chemical should not be made without reviewing a complete chemical
analysis of the deposits to be removed.
5.3.3 Aggressive and Non-Aggressive Chemical Cleaning
An aggressive chemical cleaning mitigation program involves the use of cleaning
chemicals that are designed to dissolve the deposits to be removed. A non-aggressive
program involves the use of chemicals that penetrate the deposits and disperse
(remove) them from the surfaces to which they adhere.
5-8
5.3.3.1 Aggressive Chemical Cleaning
Aggressive chemical cleaning is used when a limited amount of down time is available
or when the mitigation process must be timed with some other maintenance activity. It
is usually necessary to use aggressive chemical cleaning solutions to remove residual
deposits not removed by the physical cleaning and flushing. Typically, these deposits
are hard tubercles that have developed over an extended period of time.
This approach is often used to mitigate corrosion and fouling at readily isolated sites or
components that have access to chemical addition and the cleaning solution circulation
under controlled conditions. It is possible to set up a circulation cycle by pumping the
cleaning solution from a portable tank into and through piping of the isolated sector
and then back to the tank. Chemical tanker trucks with 6,000-gallon (22,713-liter) tanks
have been used very effectively for this purpose. If circulation is not possible, the fill
and soak method discussed earlier can be used for a short duration. However with
aggressive cleaning solutions, the fill and soak procedure requires very carefully
controlled operation because gassing and voiding may limit the effectiveness of
chemical cleaning. Localized corrosion is also a potential risk.
No matter what application approach is used with an aggressive chemical cleaning, it is
necessary to provide the capability for flushing/neutralizing the spent cleaning
solution and, after flushing, to passivate the surfaces cleaned. If passivation is not done
effectively, you may be substituting one corrosion problem for another. The passivation
process involves neutralizing the residual acidity during flushing, usually with NaOH
or Na
2
CO
3
, followed by the addition of a passivating agent if appropriate.
Chemicals used for cleaning, neutralizing, and passivating are discussed in Section 5.4
of this document. The primary criteria for selecting components of a cleaning solution
are compatibility with the materials of construction and the chemical composition of
the deposits.
Efforts must be made to minimize the major risks associated with using an aggressive
cleaning solution. It is necessary to prevent attack of the base materials of construction.
This can be minimized by not overcleaning or extending the time of contact of the base
metal with the cleaning solution. The addition of acid inhibitors to the cleaning solution
will help. The use of an acid stable, non-ionic penetrant dispersant is recommended.
This type of chemical expedites the penetration of the deposits by the cleaning solution
and increases the rate of removal. It should be added directly to the cleaning solution
as the system is initially filled. Because the cleaning solution can more readily penetrate
the deposits, it reduces the time that the metal surfaces are exposed to the aggressive
chemicals and, in general, reduces the adverse effects that this method has on the
unprotected surfaces in the system. Certain types of the penetrant/dispersant form
films on metal surfaces that provide short-term passivation to the aggressive cleaning
solutions.
5-9
Another risk is the handling and disposal of a hazardous chemical solution. Prior to the
implementation of the mitigation program, training sessions must be held that detail
exactly what is going to be done and fully cover all the safety procedures required to
carry out the program. Contingency plans must be in place and facilities available
should some unforeseen accident happen.
It should be noted that the aggressive chemical cleaning is the most likely mitigation
option to get the FPS into an as clean as possible condition.
5.3.3.2 Non-Aggressive Cleaning
Non-aggressive chemical cleaning is distinguished from the aggressive cleaning
approach only by the cleaning chemicals used. It is most appropriate when any residual
deposits found after physical and mechanical cleaning are soft, porous, or primarily
organic in composition.
The cleaning solutions are based on non-aggressive neutral or alkaline chemicals that
have a degree of surfactant activity. Included as part of the cleaning solution are
chemicals with anionic polyelectrolyte properties (for example, sodium salts of
polyacrylate, polyacrylate-acrylamide co-polymers, phosphonates, or organo-
phosphates). Alkaline chelating agents can also be used. The use of a chemically stable
biodispersant is recommended with this procedure as a way to increase the penetration
of the deposits. The function of the non-aggressive cleaning solution is to penetrate and
disperse (suspend) the deposits. The biodispersant increases the probability of a more
complete cleaning. It should be noted that the aggressive cleaning option more likely
will result in deposit-free surfaces. The non-aggressive option may not remove all
deposits, but it usually removes most of those actively involved with MIC.
It must not be assumed that the non-aggressive cleaning solution will eliminate the
activity of microorganisms contributing to MIC. A biocide/biostat treatment must be
included as part of the mitigation process to eliminate residual microbiological growth.
A biocide can be added to the rinse water or to the fresh makeup water following
cleaning. Selection of the biocide treatment is discussed in a later section of this
document.
The need for thorough flushing after a non-aggressive cleaning is obvious. However, in
most cases, it is not necessary to neutralize or passivate the metal surfaces that were in
contact with the cleaning solution. Training and safety awareness must be considered
as a high priority just as with aggressive chemical cleaning.
The non-aggressive cleaning approach can be used only when it is possible to circulate
the cleaning solution into the sector being cleaned. The use of a portable circulation
cycle discussed with aggressive cleaning can be used effectively with the non-
5-10
aggressive cleaning. The fill and soak option has not been as effective with the non-
aggressive cleaning option. In some situations, it may be necessary to repeat the
circulation stage to achieve complete mitigation. Often, the time required for non-
aggressive cleaning is greater than for an aggressive cleaning.
The other risks involved with the non-aggressive mitigation option include the need to
provide a way to remove or purge the deposit debris from the system. If this is not
achieved by flushing and draining, it might be necessary to install filters or screens in
the circulation cycle. A sidehill screen installed on the circulation return line to the
portable tank can be used to remove much of the solids from the system.
5.4 Chemicals Used for Chemical Cleaning
When selecting chemicals to be used for chemical cleaning, the potential effectiveness
of specific cleaning solutions should be tested in the laboratory or with a pilot scale
testing apparatus before being used in the FPS. A suggested laboratory test procedure
is published by EPRI in the source book Recommended Cleaning Practices for Service Water
Systems.[1] A suitable pilot scale apparatus is described by Lutey and Lozier in On-
line Chemical Cleaning for Once-Through Service Water Systems.[2]
In both cases, samples of the actual deposits collected from the FPS are exposed to the
proposed cleaning solution under conditions that simulate the conditions to be used for
the mitigation treatment. Observations are made on the rate of deposits being removed
and any adverse effect on materials of construction. It should be noted that all
sacrificial anodes should be removed from tanks and other components prior to
chemical cleaning (anodes are rarely used in piping).
5.4.1 Aggressive Chemicals
The selection of chemicals to be used as part of an aggressive cleaning solution, as
stated earlier, is based on the chemical composition of the deposits to be removed and
on the compatibility of the chemicals with the materials of construction. Table 5-1
provides a list of commonly used aggressive chemicals and their abbreviations. Table 5-
2 lists a number of aggressive chemicals that can be used with mineral (inorganic)
deposits of different chemical compositions. Table 5-3 lists these chemicals versus their
compatibility with various materials of construction. Table 5-4 illustrates the
temperature limitations associated with the chemicals when used with the various
materials of construction. The inclusion of penetrant/dispersant compounds can
enhance the dissolving activity of the cleaning solution.
5-11
Table 5-1
Chemical Names and Abbreviations
Chemical Name Abbreviation
Hydrochloric acid HCl
Hydrochloric acid - ammonium bifluoride HCl-ABF
Sulfuric acid H
2
SO
4
Sulfuric acid - ammonium bifluoride Sulfuric-ABF
Ammoniated ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid Ammoniated EDTA
Sodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate NaEDTA
pH adjusted ethylenediminetetraacetic acid pH adjusted EDTA
Phosphoric acid H
3
PO
4
Citric acid HO
2
CCH
2
C (OH)
Formic acid HCO
2
H
pH adjusted hydroxyethylenediaminetetraacetic acid pH adjusted HEDTA
Table 5-2
Mineral Deposits vs. Solvents
Major Deposit Component (see key and notes)
Solvent Carbonates Phosphate
s
Sulfates Silica Copper
Oxides
Iron
Oxides
Sulfides
HCl X X X X X
HCl - ABF X X X X X X
Sulfuric Acid X X
Sulfuric - ABF X X X
Ammoniated EDTA X X X X
Na EDTA X X
pH Adjusted EDTA X
Phosphoric Acid X X
Citric Acid X
Formic Acid X X X
pH Adjusted HEDTA X
Key:
X = compatible
Blank = not compatible
Notes:
1. All solvents are properly inhibited.
2. Small amounts of other inorganics included with the major deposit component may not rule out a
solvent choice. Solubility tests can determine this.
5-12
Table 5-3
Materials vs. Solvents - Compatibility (see key and notes)
Metals
Solvent
Carbon
Stl
Cast
Iron 300 SS 400 SS
Cu &
Alloys
Nickel
& Alloys
CR
Moly
Zinc/
Galv Alum. Magn. Titan.
HCl X A B X X X X
HCl - ABF X A B X X X
Sulfuric Acid X A X B X X X X
Sulfuric - ABF X A B X X X
Ammoniated
EDTA X X X X X X X
Na
EDTA X X X X X X X X
pH Adjusted
EDTA X X X X X X X C X
Phosphoric Acid X A X B X X X X
Citric Acid X X X X X X X X
Formic Acid X X X X X X X X X
pH Adjusted
HEDTA
X X X X X X X X
Key:
X = compatible
Blank = not compatible
A = max. temp. 120F (49C)
B = max. temp 140F (60C)
C = with proper pH
Notes:
2. 400 stainless steels do not include free machining or sulfide penetrated materials.
3. Remove sacrificial anodes such as Zn or Mg from tanks
4. It is necessary to ensure that the solvent selected does not allow a subsequent precipitation of the
metals dissolved onto dissimilar base metals. This will prevent a potential galvanic corrosion cell from
developing.
5-13
Table 5-4
Temperature Limitations (see notes)
Solvent Max. Temp. Deg. F
HCl 175
HCl -ABF 175
Sulfuric Acid 175
Sulfuric - ABF 175
Ammoniated EDTA 325
Na EDTA 450
pH Adjusted EDTA 200
Phosphoric Acid 175
Citric Acid 350
Formic Acid 250
pH Adjusted HEDTA 150
Notes:
2. These are maximums. Specific metals like cast iron may dictate lower temperatures.
3. System design may limit temperatures.
5.4.2 Non-Aggressive Chemicals
The selection of non-aggressive chemicals for corrosion and fouling mitigation is based
on the chemical and physical characteristics of the deposits. The mechanism of first
penetrating the deposit and then dispersing the materials is dependent on how soft or
porous the deposit is, how tightly it adheres to the metal surfaces, and how much
organic material makes up the deposit. Generally speaking, the non-aggressive
chemicals are most effective with deposits that are composed of some amount of
organic materials such as biomass, microbiological slime, or grease and oils. The
organic deposits may contain as much as 90% by weight inorganic materials such as
corrosion products that are being entrained and bound into the deposit by the organic
fraction.
5-14
Therefore, the most effective non-aggressive cleaning solutions are combinations of a
penetrant (surfactant) to diffuse into the porous inorganic deposit or into the organic
matrix, and a dispersant (deflocculant) that suspends the particulate materials, not
allowing them to settle out somewhere else. Examples are:
Penetrant Surfactant
Low-foam non-ionic EOP (ethylene, propylene oxide) surfactant
Sodium xylene sulfonate
Sodium lignosulfonate
Dimethylamide of fatty acid (DMAFA/DMAD)
Dodecyloctyl succinate
Dodecyle morpholine salts (acetate)
Dispersant - Deflocculant
Polyacrylic acid/polyacrylate (PPA/PA)
1-hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP)
2-phosphonobutane-1,2,4-tricarboxylic acid (PBTCA)
Sulphonated styrene/maleic anhydride (SS/MA)
Polyacrylate/2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic copolymer (PA/AMPS)
Polyphosphate salts (TKPP, STPP, hexameta-phosphate)
Dosage rates for the penetrants typically range from 50250 parts per million (ppm)
active ingredient. The dispersant dosage levels would typically be 510 times the
maximum dosage used for scale and silt control. (The dosage rate is usually limited by
how much foam can be tolerated during the cleaning process.)
The pH range of the chemically treated circulation water should be 5.07.5. If the
acidity of the cleaning solution does not produce this pH, HCl can be used to adjust the
pH to the desired range.
A shock treatment with a non-oxidizing biocide should be added to the makeup water.
Selection of the biocide is discussed in a later section of this document.
5.5 Chemicals Used for Corrosion Control
Conventional corrosion inhibitors react at metal surfaces, which inhibits the
electrochemical corrosion process, an oxidation/reduction reaction. The purpose of the
inhibitor is to block the flow of ions through a polyelectrolyte phase at the surface of
the metal. The flow of ions is an integral part of the corrosion process. Some inhibitors
function as anodic inhibitors at the site where metal dissolution occurs. Others function
as cathodic inhibitors by affecting the reduction reaction.
5-15
Corrosion inhibition can be achieved by the use of film-forming materials that passivate
metal surfaces by forming a protective film on the surface of the metal. There is not a
specific electrochemical reaction involved with this mechanism. Inhibitors of this type
are usually based on a composition of hydrophobic amines. They are not widely used
in FPSs because they can potentially contribute to fouling problems unless carefully
controlled.
5.5.1 Ferrous Alloy Corrosion Inhibitors
Typical corrosion inhibitors used with carbon steel in FPSs are based on
orthophosphate, organo-phosphono compounds, polyphosphate, zinc, and molybdate.
Nitrites or borate/nitrites are typically not used in FPS systems because of potential
microbiological problems. Chromates have been used in the past but currently are not
because of environmental regulations on the use of heavy metal inhibitors.
Table 5-5 tabulates data on the inhibitors used in FPSs for corrosion control with
ferrous alloys.
Table 5-5
Inhibitors Used for Corrosion Control with Ferrous Alloys
Chemical
Dosage range
(ppm active) pH range Advantages Disadvantages
Environmental
Issues
Zinc 0.23.0 6.08.5 Low cost Zn stabilization
difficult at high pH
Local discharge
limitations
Organic
Phosphates
0.25.0 as
PO
4
6.09.0 Low cost Possible Cu
attack
Few
Inorganic
Orthophosphates
1.020.0
as PO
4
6.08.0 Low cost Pitting prone
phosphate
deposits
Few
Organic
Polyphosphates
1.010
as PO
4
6.08.0 Not pitting
prone, revert
to
O-PO
4
Phosphate
deposits
Few
Molybdates 50200 7.59.0 Few envir-
onmental
restrictions
High cost Few
5-16
5.5.2 Copper Alloy Corrosion Inhibitors
The chemicals used for control of copper corrosion are generally classified as azoles.
They are considered to be film-forming or anodic inhibitors. The basic chemicals of this
type used in FPSs are:
Mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT)
Tolyltriazole (TTA)
Benzotriazole (BZT)
Butylbenzotriazole (BBT)
Modified TTA (halogen resistant azole)
The use of copper corrosion inhibitors is limited in FPSs. However, if it is necessary to
deal with pH of the water in the system over 9.5 and if copper is a significant material
of construction, it is advised to consider the addition of these compounds as part of the
total treatment program.
5.5.3 Other Inhibitors
Other inhibitor options include chemicals that are used to affect the chemical
characteristics of the water in the FPS. Conditioning the water to make it less conducive
to corrosion can effectively complement the addition of conventional corrosion
inhibitors. For example, increased pH makes water less corrosive to carbon steel
components but could increase scale formation. Eliminating oxygen reduces the
potential for corrosion of most metals.
Adjusting the pH with sodium carbonate or sodium hydroxide to a range of 8.510.0
will function to reduce corrosion and perhaps the growth rate of most MIC
microorganisms, especially the acid-producing bacteria (APB) and the slime-forming
bacteria (SFB). Sodium sulfite is an effective oxygen scavenger. The addition of sodium
sulfite to provide a residual of 50100 ppm SO
3
has been effective in protecting aqueous
systems from corrosion by dissolved oxygen. This is a very effective way to eliminate
the formation of iron hydroxide/oxide tuberculation. The establishment of an
anaerobic environment may appear to provide an advantage to the anaerobic bacteria.
However, the prevention of tuberculation far outweighs the effect of creating an
anaerobic environment when attempting to control or prevent MIC. The elimination of
O
2
also provides benefits in reducing non-MIC corrosion.
5-17
5.6 Chemical Used for Micro/Macrobiological Control
Biocides are perhaps the most critical component of a water treatment program,
including that for the FPS. It is not possible to obtain maximum benefits from the other
components in a treatment program if microbiological growth is out of control. The
technology for microorganism control now includes chemicals called biocides, chemicals
for controlling microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, and algae); and molluscicides to control
macroorganisms (barnacles, clams, mussels, oysters, hydroids, and bryozoa). These are
the primary groups of organisms involved directly or indirectly with corrosion and
fouling in FPSs. Some chemicals act as both biocides and molluscicides.
The fundamental concept of biocidal versus biostatic activity must be considered when
selecting the appropriate chemical to use in FPS. A biocide is a compound that literally
kills existing macro/microorganisms. A biostat is a compound that reduces the
reproduction rate of the microbiological population. It does not control microbiological
growth by killing, but rather by preventing the microorganisms from reproducing
(increasing in numbers) to levels where problems may occur. The selection of a
treatment chemical to control micro/macroorganisms is then based on what the job is
that you want the chemical to do. It should be biocidal or biostatic or both, determined
by whether you are in control or mitigation mode.
Mitigation mode treatments require killing or eradicating existing populations of
undesirable types of macro/microorganisms. The job to be done is quick-kill the
existing population and then no longer be part of the environment. This is a biocidal
function. The prevention mode treatment requires the chemical to persist in the
environment for an extended period of time to provide biostatic activity, controlling the
population from reproducing to critical levels.
Some non-oxidizing biocides have both biocidal and biostatic properties. A persistent
biocide/biostat should be used when it is expected that the system will be in an
extended wet lay-up condition with little or no makeup water added. This is a typical
FPS operation mode. Oxidizing biocides can effectively provide a quick-kill function
but are not typically used to provide a biostat function.
The compound selected for FPS microorganism control, including MIC, should have
efficacy as a biocide/biostat for those microorganisms involved with MIC. Generally,
these include sulfate-reducing bacteria, iron/metal-oxidizing bacteria, acid-producing
bacteria, and slime-forming bacteria. In some circumstances, nitrogen compound
metabolizing bacteria can be a concern. There continues to be more information
becoming available that fungi may be a concern with MIC but not typically in FPSs.
Recent publications illustrate that macrofouling by the mollusk groups mentioned
earlier has become a major challenge in FPSs. The fouling problem is increasing in
frequency and severity. There is now evidence that macrofouling can be associated
5-18
with severe MIC even in closed systems, including FPSs. Therefore, when utilizing
surface water makeup sources, it is becoming increasingly important to select treatment
chemicals that potentially have both macrofouling and microfouling control
capabilities.
5.6.1 Chemical Used as Biocides/Biostats
5.6.1.1 Oxidizing Chemicals
Oxidizing biocides are chemicals whose effectiveness depends upon their ability to
oxidize and thus destroy organic material. Their biocidal action is based on oxidizing
the microorganisms and, in some cases, the organic materials that serve as nutrients for
the microorganisms. The oxidizing biocide is consumed as it oxidizes the organic
material, leaving no residual oxidation potential and, therefore, no biostatic activity.
The chemistry, advantages/disadvantages, and application information on oxidizing
biocides are tabulated in Tables 5-6, 5-7, and 5-8.
Table 5-6
Oxidizing Chemicals for Microbiological Control
Chemical
Targeted
Organisms
Residual
Dosage
Range
(ppm)
pH
Range Advantages Disadvantages
Environmental
Issues
Chlorine B, IDB, A, 0.11.0
FAO
6.0
7.5
Low cost Corrosive,
haz gas
Broad
restrictions
Sodium Hypochlorite B, IDB, A, 0.11.0
FAO
6.0
7.5
Low cost Poor kill @
higher pH
Discharge
restrictions
Chlorine/Bromine
Liquid
B, Bsp,
SRB, IDB, A
0.050.5
FAO
6.0
9.5
Effective @
higher pH
Moderate
higher cost
Discharge
restrictions
Chlorine/Bromine;
Solid Hydantoins
B, Bsp,
SRB, IDB, A
0.050.50
FAO
6.0
9.5
Effective @
higher pH;
handling
Higher cost; low
solubility;
pressure
limitations
Discharge
restrictions
Chlorine Donor; Solid
Chloroisocyanurates
B, IDB, A, 0.101.0
FAO
6.0
7.5
Handling Higher cost Discharge
restrictions
Chlorine/Br Donor;
Solid
Bromo-Chlorinated
Isocyanurates
B, Bsp,
SRB,
IDB, A
0.050.50
FAO
6.0
9.5
Handling Higher cost Discharge
restrictions
Chlorine Dioxide B, Bsp, IDB,
A
0.11.0
FAO
6.0
9.5
No ammonia
react; no
THMs
Hazardous;
explosive
Discharge
restrictions
Hydrogen Peroxide B, Bsp,
IDB, A, F
0.23.0
FAO
6.0
9.5
Decays to
oxygen
and water
High cost; slow None
5-19
Key
B = bacteria, slime formers
Bsp = bacteria, spore formers
SRB = sulfate-reducing bacteria
IDB = iron-depositing bacteria
A = algae
F = fungus
Note: The free residual oxidants (FAOs) shown here are generally considered effective in FPS
applications. Actual residuals needed are site specific and may be higher or lower depending on
circumstances.
Table 5-7
Non-Oxidizing Biocides
Chemical
Targeted
Organisms
Dose
Range
(ppm)
pH
Environment
al Issues
Ionene Polyquats B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB, A
520 69+ Effective
biostat
Not effective
high turbidity
Low Effluent
biotoxicity
Quaternary
Amines
(Quats)
B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB, A
10100 69 May foam;
cationic
(deactivate
dispersants);
hardness
reaction
Effluent
biotoxicity
MBT B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB
18 <8.3 Short
half-life
Effluent
biotoxicity
Organo-Sulfur
(carbamates)
B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB
5050 6.59.0 Corrosive to
copper
Effluent
biotoxicity
Isothiazoline B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB, A, F
15 69 Hazardous; less
effective in low
TH water
Effluent
biotoxicity
Glutaraldehyde B, Bsp, SRB,
IDB, A
50100 6.59.0 Degrades to
CO
2
& H
2
O
@ pH ~9
Deactivated by
NH
3
Effluent
biotoxicity
Key
B = bacteria, slime formers
Bsp = bacteria, spore formers
SRB = sulfate-reducing bacteria
MBT = methylene bis thiocyanate
IDB = iron-depositing bacteria
A = algae
F = fungus
5-20
Table 5-8
Chemicals for Macrobiological Control
Chemical
Targeted
Organisms
Dose
Range
(ppm)
pH
Environmental
Issues
Chlorine AC, ZM,
AO, H, BM
0.11.0 6.07.5 Low cost Corrosive gas Broad
restrictions
Sodium Hypochlorite AC, ZM,
AO, H, BM
0.11.0 6.07.5 Extended
re-application
Broad
restrictions
Chlorine/Bromine
Liquid
AC, ZM,
AO, H, BM
0.11.0 6.08.5 Extended
re-application
Broad
restrictions
Quaternary Amines
(quats)
AC, ZM,
AO,
BM
1.03.0 <9 Persistent Not effective
high turbidity
Minimal
restrictions
Ionene polyquats AC, ZM,
AO,
BM
2.020 6.09+ Persistent Not effective
high turbidity
Minimal
restrictions
Key
AC = Asian clams
ZM = zebra mussels
AO = American oysters
H = hydroids
BM = blue mussels
Chlorine and chlorine-producing compounds are the most widely accepted form of
oxidizing biocide in cooling water and other process water systems. However, their
routine use, including that in FPSs, for microbiological (MIC) control is limited by three
factors. If incorrectly applied, they:
Contribute to increased corrosion
Have reduced effectiveness/lower efficacy at pH above 8.3
Possess a non-persistent residual that provides no biostatic activity
When dealing with a pH above 8.0, bromine-based oxidizing biocides should be
considered.
Oxidizing biocides used to pretreat makeup water and to treat FPSs specifically
include:
5-21
Chlorine based
Chlorine gas (seldom used in nuclear plants)
Sodium hypochlorite
Calcium hypochlorite
Di/tri-chloro-isocyanuric acid
Chlorine dioxide
Bromine based
Hypobromous acid (HOBr) , activated NaBr in situ
Stabilized hypobromite
Bromo-chloro dimethyl hydantoin
Bromo-chloro methylethyl hydantoin
Hydrogen peroxide (H
2
O
2
)
5.6.1.2 Non-Oxidizing Biocides/Biostats
Non-oxidizing biocides are chemicals that control the growth of microorganisms
through a toxic mechanism rather than by an oxidation process. The mechanism of
toxicity can be as a systemic poison, by cell structure disruption, or by prevention of
oxygen transfer. Some of the chemicals have a broad spectrum of activity against
bacteria, fungi, algae, and macrofoulers under a broad range of environmental
conditions. These are called broad spectrum biocides. Others have very focused
activity against specific types of microorganisms under a narrow range of
environmental conditions. Many of the original biocides were based on either phenol or
heavy metal chemistry to provide the toxic mechanism. Because they persisted for a
long period of time, they also provided excellent biostatic activity. However, these
types of materials were very abusive to the local environment. They are no longer
permitted for use by most regulatory agencies.
The environmentally friendly compounds used as biocides have toxic mechanisms but
are designed to kill the microorganism and not persist in a toxic form in the
environment. For this reason, very few compounds now available have biocidal as well
as biostatic activity against the microorganisms associated with problems in FPSs.
There are many different compounds and blends of compounds that are used in
process cooling waters.[3]
The non-oxidizing biocides/biostats that have been used in FPSs include the following:
Organo-sulfur (carbamates) compounds
Glutaraldehyde (1,5-pentanedial)
5-22
Isothiazolone
Quaternary ammonium salts (quats)
Ionene polymeric quaternary ammonium compounds (polyquats)
Methylene bis thiocyanate (MBT)
Organo-sulfur (carbamates) compounds These are sodium or potassium salts of
dimethyldithiocarbamates. They are broad spectrum biocides that have efficacy against
aerobic and anaerobic bacteria associated with microbiological problems in FPSs. Their
optimum pH range is 6.59.0. Typical dosages are 2550 ppm active ingredient. Under
optimum conditions and at the maximum dosage, the carbamates can provide limited
biostatic activity.
Limitations are that they form a complex on copper surfaces that reduces their
effectiveness. Use of an azole inhibitor overcomes this limitation to some degree. The
carbamates will also complex with suspended or soluble iron to form an insoluble
precipitate.
The carbamates have no known activity against macrofouling organisms and are not
E.P.A. registered for molluscicide application.
Glutaraldehyde This material has efficacy against fungi and anaerobic/aerobic
bacteria associated with microbiological problems in FPSs. It is a broad spectrum
biocide, effective over a broad range of pHs and temperatures when used at maximum
dosage levels. Glutaraldehyde is compatible with most corrosion and scale inhibitors.
Its effectiveness is enhanced when used with penetrants/dispersants. It is generally
non-foaming, odorless, and non-corrosive to most materials of construction at
recommended use levels. The active concentration in treated water can be measured
with a field test kit.
Typical dosage levels are 50100 ppm active ingredient.
Limitations are that the half-life of glutaraldehyde is relatively low at the pH ranges
found in FPSs. Therefore, to persist and provide biostatic activity, high frequency
additions are necessary (weekly to monthly).
Glutaraldehyde is not E.P.A. registered for use as a molluscicide.
Isothiazolone This is a mixture of 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazoline-1-one and 2-
methyl-4-isothiazoline-3-one. It is a broad spectrum biocide with efficacy against algae
and sessile aerobic bacteria. It is effective against anaerobic bacteria including SRB
5-23
when used with a penetrant dispersant so the biocide can penetrate into the biomass.
The pH range is 6.59.0 with 8.0 being optimum.
The persistence, or half-life, is significantly reduced at pH above 8.0. Therefore, to
provide biostatic activity, high frequency dosages are often necessary (weekly to
monthly) when used in FPSs. Isothiazolone is hazardous to handle because of its high
dermal sensitivity/toxicity. Application with dosing equipment should be considered.
Typical dosage levels are 25 ppm active ingredient.
Isothiazolone is not E.P.A. registered for use as a molluscicide.
Quaternary ammonium salts (quats) The quats are a group of cationically charged
ammonium compounds of fatty acids with varying carbon-chain lengths. A typical quat
of this type is alkyl dimethyl benzo ammonium chloride (50% C-14, 40% C-12, 10%
C-10). The chain length is relevant to the dispersibility/solubility of the compound in
water and, thereby, indirectly to its efficacy. These compounds have good biocidal
activity against aerobic and anaerobic bacteria in FPSs. The quats are broad spectrum
biocides under a wide range of pHs and temperatures. When used in systems
containing relatively low turbidity and suspended solids, the quats provide adequate
biostatic activity in FPSs.
Many of the quat formulations are surface active, which assists its activity against
sessile organisms. However, this may create undesirable foaming conditions when
used at the higher dosage levels. The cationic charge density may result in some
incompatibility with anionically charged scale inhibitors and silt dispersants. High
dosage levels are required when used in saltwater or in water with high concentrations
of suspended solids.
Typical dosage levels are 10100 ppm active ingredient. The active ingredient
concentration in treated water can be measured by using a field test kit.
Some of the specific quaternary ammonium salts, such as the example above, are E.P.A.
registered for use as a molluscicide. Under certain treated water discharge conditions,
detoxification treatment may be required.
Ionene polymeric quaternary ammonium compounds These are referred to as
polyquats or polyionene quats. An example is
poly[oxyethylen(dimethyliminio)ethylene(dimethylimino)ethylene dichloride].
Although the compound contains quaternary nitrogen, its chemistry is significantly
different from the alkyl-benzo-ammonium chloride salts. The polyquats are low
molecular weight ionene polymers. Ionene designates that the quaternary nitrogen is
contained in the polymer chain, making the compound chemically very stable. The
cationic polymeric characteristics enable the compound to concentrate microflocs of
5-24
microorganisms, thereby reducing the minimum inhibitory concentrations required to
control the growth of microorganisms.
The polyquats have efficacy as biocides against the aerobic and anaerobic bacteria that
cause microbiological problems in FPSs. They are low-foaming and effective under a
wide range of pHs and temperatures. High levels of total dissolved solids or chlorides
do not limit its effectiveness. They are totally water soluble and persistent, enabling the
active ingredient to diffuse into water-filled dead-leg piping in an FPS. They have
very low dermal toxicity.
The primary limitation of the polyquats is that their effectiveness is reduced when used
in waters with high turbidity or suspended solids. Polyquats are not normally used in
mitigation programs.
Typical dosage levels in FPSs are 520 ppm active ingredient. The active ingredient
concentration in treated water can be measured by using a field test kit.
Formulations of polyquats are available that have been developed specifically for use in
controlling mollusks. Commercially available products based on polyquat chemistry
have been E.P.A. registered for use as a molluscicide in fresh water and seawater (once-
through, circulating, and closed process water systems).
Methylene bis thiocyanate - MBT MBT is not a broad spectrum biocide. It is used
alone or blended with other active ingredients to provide highly effective biocidal
activity against specific types of microorganisms, particularly aerobic and anaerobic
bacteria including SRB. It is used to provide a quick-kill function in mitigation
treatments in FPSs, but not usually as part of a maintenance/control treatment
program. MBT hydrolyzes rapidly at pH above 7.5 and as a quick-kill biocide does not
provide significant biostatic activity.
MBT is hazardous to handle with high dermal sensitivity/toxicity. Therefore, dosing
equipment should be considered. Typical dosage levels are 210 ppm active ingredient.
MBT is not E.P.A. registered for use as a molluscicide.
5.6.2 Non-Toxic Control Chemicals
The traditional approach to macro/microorganism control has been to kill the
macro/microorganisms or at least prevent them from reproducing. Current developing
technology has demonstrated that other options may be used to control
macro/microbiological problems. The driving force behind the development of this
technology is eliminating the need for toxic compounds to control
5-25
macro/microbiological growth. In most situations, this is much more acceptable from
an environmental stewardship position.
Enzymes - One option is the use of enzymes that interfere with the process of
colonization by microorganisms. These enzymes do not kill the microorganisms. They
simply alter the ecology to the extent that the microorganism cannot cause problems.
Lack of colonization subsequently reduces the ability of the microorganisms to survive
in many environments. They eliminate the formation of biomass and biofouling on
internal surfaces of FPSs. Commercially available formulations of non-toxic enzyme-
based products are now being tested under actual operating conditions. The enzymes
include proteases, lipidases, carboxylases, amylases, and xylenases. Some products
being tested involve blends of different types of enzymes. Progress of this developing
technology is discussed in the literature.[4]
Biodispersants - Biodispersants are chemical compounds that disperse biofilm or
biomass within the bulk water or from sites where it is attached to the surfaces in a
system. Their most important function is to disrupt sessile colonization of the
microorganisms that leads to biofouling and MIC. Biodispersant technology is not new.
It has been used for several years as a means to enhance the activity of both oxidizing
and non-oxidizing biocides. However, recently dispersant technology has provided a
number of new non-toxic chemical compounds that have interesting biodispersant
properties. A few based on dodecyl-amine chemistry, have become commercial
products with claims of controlling certain microbiological problems without the use of
toxic chemicals.
5.6.3 Non-Chemical Control Options
Several non-chemical control approaches have been tested to control MIC,
microfouling, and macrofouling in many types of industrial process water systems.
These have been relatively successful in a few types of systems. However, only limited
success has been achieved with non-chemical treatment in FPSs. Non-chemical
approaches include:
Thermal treatment
Filtration and straining
Ultraviolet radiation
Various black box magnetic
Heavy metal ionization devices
Predatorial organisms
5-26
Coatings and linings
System and water velocity designs
Ultrasonic treatment
Some think that microbiological and corrosion-resistant coatings offer some degree of
potential control in FPSs. Recent advances in coating technology and the application
methods of coatings have proven to be of some benefit. Cement linings,
thermal/solvent set epoxy coatings, and synthetic elastomeric coatings have provided
benefits when the coatings were shop applied to components used for replacement
maintenance. In situ type linings and inserts have been installed in a limited number of
large diameter buried FPS pipeline and headers. Results to date appear to be favorable.
It is the general consensus at this time that non-chemical control procedures still require
further development and, for the near future, supplemental chemical treatments are
still needed.
5.7 Fouling Control
Fouling or siltation is the result of the deposition of suspended solids. For this
document, biofouling has been discussed as a separate issue. Suspended solids are
defined as any insoluble (filterable) material in the water. Materials that are included in
the definition of suspended solids are:
Silt
Fine silica
Organic debris
Oil and grease contaminants
Corrosion products
Much of the suspended solids are carried into FPSs with the makeup water. Limited
amounts of suspended solids are formed within the system. Therefore, since the total
volume of water added to the system following initial makeup is low, fouling or silting
problems are typically minimal in FPSs. Perhaps the greatest source of troublesome
fouling materials is corrosion products generated by corrosion within the system itself.
In many cases, controlling corrosion results in controlling most of the fouling that
occurs in FPSs.
5-27
In very rare cases, suspended solids can be generated within the system as a result of
precipitation of incompatible treatment chemicals. The actual fouling occurs at sites
where the flow velocity is low (< 2 ft/sec.[< 0.6 m/sec.]) or as a result of stagnant
conditions during wet lay-up operation typical to FPSs.
5.7.1 Chemicals Used for Fouling Control
The ideal approach to fouling control should be to limit the intrusion of suspended
solids into the system and to prevent subsequent precipitation and corrosion within the
system. However, chemical control processes are most typically used for fouling control
in FPSs.
Silt/inorganic suspended solids - Silt and other inorganic suspended solids are
controlled by the addition of dispersants composed of acrylate-based polymers, such as
polyacrylic acid or sodium polyacrylate. In addition to the acrylates, polyacrylamides
and acrylamide/acrylate copolymers are also applicable.
Typical dosage levels depend on the amount of foulant to be dispersed. They range
from 15 ppm active ingredient.
Sludge - Occasionally, sludge fluidizers are required when the suspended solids are
primarily organic debris. The most common sludge fluidizers are water-soluble, long-
chain, high molecular weight polyacrylamides. The polymer prevents the packing of
the debris into a dense sludge. This allows the debris to remain fluffy and can easily be
flushed from the system.
Typical dosage levels are 0.020.5 ppm active ingredient. Care should be taken not to
overtreat because excess polymer can contribute to fouling.
Oil/grease and other organic suspended solids Oil and grease contamination can be
controlled by the addition of surfactants that are classed as wetting agents or low
foaming surfactants. They act by emulsifying and dispersing the oily or slimy
suspended solids. In some cases, the surfactant can actually strip the deposited
suspended solids from the fouled surfaces. These materials may already be part of the
total treatment program used as biodispersants discussed earlier. If not and if treatment
is needed, the surfactant is added as a shock treatment.
Typical shock treatment dosage levels are 1050 ppm active ingredient.
5.7.2 Non-Chemical Means of Fouling Control
In addition to chemical methods of fouling control, there are mechanical means of
mitigating suspended solids problems. They include mechanical pretreatment of the
5-28
makeup water by filtration and clarification. Full stream or sidestream filtration of the
FPS water can be done when chronic suspended solids problems occur.
Periodic mechanical/physical cleaning, usually by the flush and drain procedure, was
discussed earlier as a primary method for controlling fouling. See that section for
further details on non-chemical methods of suspended solids control.
5.8 Non-Chemical Corrosion Control
Most FPSs have some components that consist of tankage and buried pipe. These
components are often constructed of carbon steel or other materials that are susceptible
to corrosion. The procedures for controlling this corrosion are not unique to FPSs.
Reference to published guidelines should be made for the specific details on non-
chemical corrosion control programs.
Corrosion control of the interior surfaces of tanks and pipe should be part of the overall
chemical treatment of the FPS water system. Corrosion control of the exterior surfaces
of tanks and buried pipes is based on non-chemical methods such as coatings and/or
cathodic protection technology.
5.8.1 Non-Chemical Corrosion Control of Tanks and Buried Pipe
5.8.1.1 Coatings
The FPS water storage tank may rely on a coating system to protect the tank. AWWA
Standard D 102 is the standard reference for the proper installation of tank coatings.
The coating system may be the only corrosion protection for the tank. These are
generally designed to last up to 10 years The coating systems have been improved over
the years, and many now are dielectric material such as vinyl- or epoxy-based coatings
with up to 50-year life spans. The coatings have various immersion resistance outlined
in NACE Standard Test Method, TM-01-74, Laboratory Methods for the Evaluation of
Protective Coatings Used as Lining Materials in Immersion Service.
Underground piping is typically protected against corrosion by the use of various types
of coating or coverings (wrappings). The degree of protection provided depends on:
Previous treatment of the surface to be coated or wrapped
Coating thickness
Uniformity and flaw-freeness of application
Properties of the coating binder, pigment, and other additives
5-29
Protection is ensured only if the coating is free from faults. Faults render the pipe more
easily penetrated by water and cause localized corrosion sites. When laying piping in
rocky ground or gravel, particular attention must be paid to ensure that the coating is
not damaged by stones.
Wrappings are used mostly with underground pipe. Pipe wrappings must satisfy the
following requirement:
Temperature stability
Resistance to aging or oxidation
Resistance to impact and indentation
Distensibility
Good adhesion to the substrate material
Chemical resistance
Low water vapor and oxygen diffusion rates
Electrical insulation capacity
Corrosion protection tapes made of various plastics have recently become available. If
the installation standards for wraps and the processing instructions of the
manufacturers are carefully followed, underground piping may be reliably protected
from corrosion in the long term.
All coatings can fail and are extremely susceptible to damage. Once they are damaged,
the area becomes an accelerated pit corrosion site, and the failure probability is
increased.
5.8.1.2 Cathodic Protection
Galvanic cathodic protection (sacrificial anodes) is not generally recognized as a
method to protect submerged surfaces of piping or storage tanks. The only feasible
reason to permit this type of protection is if it is not possible to get a dc power supply
to the component. The sacrificial anodes used cannot vary the protection current and,
therefore, problems of over- and underprotection can occur.
However, impressed current cathodic protection (ICP) is used with both storage tanks
and buried piping. The two major components of impressed current protection systems
are the dc power supply controller (rectifier) and the anode system. The range of
5-30
output current capacity required by the rectifier is determined by assuming the area of
bare steel to be protected, 20% of the submerged surface area before recoating for
coated tanks, and the submerged area for uncoated tanks or piping.
The second major component of an ICP system is the anode system. The type of anode
material and the type of suspension system is typically based on the components
susceptibility to icing conditions. Seasonal or long-life anode systems are available.
Seasonal designs consist of aluminum rods installed and serviced through an access
hole in the component (for example, roof of the tank). Long-life anode systems include
suspension systems that are ice resistant and use materials that have a designed life of
up to 20 years.
Flaws in coatings or wrappings on buried pipe are difficult to avoid in actual practice.
Therefore, ICP is often used in conjunction with coatings or wrappings. The protective
current requirements of the ICP system are reduced by coating or wrappings.
Suggested methods of ICP for buried pipe in soil are tabulated in Table 5-9.
Table 5-9
Cathodic Protection Criteria for Buried Pipe
Mean Soil
Resistivity
(Ohm/cm) Rating of Soil Possible Method of Protection
100,00025,000 Not corrosive CP not necessary with uniform soils
25,00010,000 Hardly corrosive CP may not be necessary or
ICP/Mg anodes (1.6 kg)
10,0005,000 Slightly corrosive Impressed current/Mg anodes
(1.6 or 3.6 kg)
5,0002,000 Moderately corrosive Mg anodes (58 kg) impressed
current
2,0001,000 Highly corrosive Mg anodes (810 kg) impressed
current
Under 1,000 Very highly corrosive Impressed current, MG & Zn
anodes (1015 kg), No Mg if
pH <4.0
Properly maintained impressed current cathodic protection systems for uncoated or
coated tanks with holidays can be protected from corrosion. A coatings major function
with a cathodically protected tank is to reduce the cost of power to protect the tank and
reduce the rate of anode consumption.
5-31
There are significant differences in manually and automatically controlled systems.
Automatically controlled ICP systems use one or more long-life reference electrodes
that continuously monitor the protection levels maintained on the submerged surfaces.
The reference electrode continuously determines tank-to-water potential. A controller
compares actual tank-to-water potential to a preset value and automatically adjusts the
output of the rectifier. The system needs to be maintained and adjusted to work
properly, but this represents the best protection available for the water storage tank.
Manually controlled rectifiers are generally not recommended for use with water
storage tanks because they require frequent monitoring, testing, and manual
adjustments of the rectifier current output when current requirements change due to
change in operating conditions in the tank. Failure to adjust current output can result in
corrosion due to underprotection or coating damage due to overprotection.
5.8.2 Accumulation of Foreign Materials on Sprinklers
Sprinklers may be located in atmospheres that are corrosive or cause an accumulation
of foreign materials to adhere to the sprinklers. This is called loading and can increase
the sprinkler activation time or cause it to fail. Sprinklers should be selected for the
environment they are intended to operate in and be inspected for the accumulation of
foreign materials.
5.8.3 Dry Piping in Dry Pipe Sprinkler, Deluge, and Preaction Systems
Dry sections of these systems must be maintained dry. These systems have proven to
corrode at a higher rate than wet piping due to improper or incomplete draining,
leakage of valves, or repeated inadvertent system trips. In all cases, the water must be
drained completely. Low point drains must be identified and used. Sloped systems
need to be reviewed to determine if adequate slope is provided to the drains. Dry
sections of these systems corrode at a higher rate due to the availability of oxygen when
water is present.
The condensation of moisture in the air supply of dry sprinkler systems may result in
hard scale forming on the bottom of the piping. These systems should have adequate
air dryers that are properly maintained and inspected for efficient operation.
5.8.4 Foam-Water Systems
Foam leakage and mixing with water in foam-water systems is a significant problem in
these systems. The boundary between the foam and the water must be maintained.
Foam concentrates mixed with water adhere to interior surfaces of piping, reducing the
effective diameter of the piping or causing complete blockage in severe cases. This
5-32
boundary must be inspected and maintained, and the piping needs to be internally
inspected in these areas at each possible opportunity.
5.8.5 Other Non-Chemical Corrosion Control Procedures
Corrosion of storage tanks and buried pipe is also occasionally prevented by suitable
soil treatment instead of protective coatings or cathodic protection (CP). Protection is
provided by embedding pipe in pipe trenches or tanks in tank pits with a stone-free
sand or lime layer not less than 2025 cm thick. Alternatively, a soil neutralized with
lime can be used.
Back-filling pipe trenches with sand offers good long-term protection in corrosive clay
or plastic clay soils. The protective effect of the sand packing in poorly drained soils is
insignificant since the exchange of corrosive substances is not prevented.
Plastic piping is increasingly used today instead of metal piping in particularly
corrosive soils.
Specific measures that may provide some degree protection against MIC in soil include:
Aeration or sulfide precipitation when SRBs are present in the soil
Application of resistant coatings or wrappings
Cathodic protection (more negative cathodic protective potentials have to be applied
in the presence of SRBs)
Addition of heavy metal salts (such as copper, chrome, zinc, selenites) or specific
biocides into the soil where environmental regulations will allow
Note: The fact that archaeological finding of iron had not corroded even after 2000
years in soils containing SRBs is due to the fact that soil contained stannates, which
counteract the effects of the bacteria.
5.9 Regulatory and Registration Considerations
The guidelines presented in this document include discussions related to non-chemical
treatment procedures to control corrosion and fouling. In some plants, the FPS cannot
be chemically treated using traditional methods for control or mitigation purposes
because of system design and limitations associated with environmental regulations. In
these cases, chemical treatment may not be a viable option for controlling corrosion and
fouling in FPSs. Non-chemical procedures may be the only option. The guidelines are
intended to be flexible and support the need to assess the problems on an individual
5-33
site and system basis and then make a determination of what is to be done on an
individual value and cost assessment.
The use of all treatment chemicals for control and mitigation programs in FPS must be
approved under current code, safety, and environmental regulations. These
regulations are administered by local, state, and federal agencies. The regulations deal
with:
On-site storage of treatment chemicals
Application procedures
Disposal of containers
Disposal of unused treatment chemicals
Discharge of water containing treatment chemicals
Discharge of sludge and waste water containing treatment chemicals
Compliance with local, state and federal regulations
Compliance with licensing requirements
The responsibility for ensuring that the regulations are complied with is usually
assigned to the environmental, safety, and support engineering departments at most
nuclear facilities. Their efforts should be supported by collaboration with the vendors
or suppliers of the treatment chemicals.
The manufacture and use of biocides/biostats are regulated by the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The manufacturers must have E.P.A.
registration and approved labels for each type of application of the compound. The
manufacturer can sell active ingredients only to formulators or end-users that have
their own registration or subregistration and approved labels.
The manufacturer/vendor is obligated by law to provide the end-user with current
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and labels that specifically define:
The approved type of use and dosage levels
Manufacturers name and address
Chemical name of active ingredients and concentration in product
E.P.A. registration number, if required
5-34
Health, fire, chemical reactivity, and explosive hazard data
Toxicological and aquatic toxicity data
Handling, storage, and disposal procedures
Description of special precautions and protective equipment required
All nuclear power generation plants have a program to monitor chemical treatment
procedures that ensure compliance with all applicable regulations.
6-1
6
PERFORMANCE MONITORING
6.1 Discussion
This discussion relates to assessing the performance of corrosion and fouling control
measures used in FPSs. Assessment of the performance of the FPS itself is discussed in
Section 4 of this document.
Monitoring involves the process of gathering data on specific criteria over a period of
time for the purpose of determining whether system conditions and control procedures
have been maintained at the specifications considered necessary for compliance of the
system to its function. This determination is based on a comparison of current
conditions with past conditions. In this sense, the monitoring procedure is considered
to be gathering historical data. Historical data provides the basis for detecting
whether changes in operating conditions have occurred over a period of time and
whether adjustments in the control procedures are required. For example, these data
can be used to determine what effect changes, such as change in makeup water
temperature, have on the performance of treatment chemicals and on the corrosion
rates.
Monitoring also involves the process of performing specific tests to indicate what the
conditions are at the time of the tests. In this sense, the monitoring procedure is
considered to be the gathering of real-time data. Real-time data are used to confirm
that the control parameters are adequate and meet the specific conditions of the control
program.
The objective of the control program is to control corrosion and fouling in order to
prevent their limiting the designed function of the FPS. The objective of performance
monitoring is to:
Confirm that the control program performance parameters are being maintained.
Confirm that performance goals are being met.
Identify adverse trends in a timely manner.
Performance Monitoring
6-2
The tools used for performance monitoring are not significantly different from those
used in closed loop cooling water systems (CCW), service water systems (SWS), or
condenser cooling water systems. However, because of some of the unique
characteristics of FPSs, the procedures for using these tools may require some
modifications.
Performance monitoring of FPS control programs is dependent on several factors that
include:
System metallurgy
System design
System integrity specifications
Characteristics/specifications of the chemical treatment control program
Current system operating conditions
Site-specific history of performance and operating conditions
Selection and accessibility of the monitoring site
Techniques widely used for performance monitoring in FPSs include:
Corrosion monitoring techniques
Fouling monitoring techniques
Microbiological monitoring techniques
Visual inspections
Nondestructive (NDE) techniques
Corrosion or fouling records
Chemical analysis
This guideline uses the terms control parameters and diagnostic parameters. Control
parameters are parameters such as pH, corrosion inhibitor concentration, corrosion
rates, and microbiological survey data that assist in the control of a chemical treatment
program and the operation of the FPS. These could have an immediate effect on
corrosion in the system. Diagnostic parameters provide baseline information that can
6-3
alert the system chemistry reviewer to potential problems or be used to assist with
troubleshooting of problems.
6.2 Corrosion Monitoring Techniques
Corrosion in FPS most frequently occurs as general (lateral wall-thinning) corrosion or
pitting corrosion occurring under deposits, at welds, or at stress-associated sites (for
example, threaded unions). Corrosion rates in FPSs are dependent on materials of
construction, fabrication methods, operation conditions, water chemistry, and
microbiological factors. Each specific system is designed with an allowable wall
thickness loss. However, it is generally accepted that a corrosion rate of > 3.0 mils per
year (mpy) (>0.08 mm per year or mm/y) on schedule 40 carbon steel is considered
excessive. A corrosion rate of > 0.5 mpy (> 0.01 mm/y) on thin wall carbon steel
(schedule 10) may also be considered excessive. Pitting corrosion is such a variable
phenomenon that establishing an acceptable rate, or even accepting a procedure for
measuring a rate, remains a challenge. Criteria for acceptance or non-acceptance of
performance in pitting control is based on whether pitting is occurring. The rate of
pitting corrosion is generally not a consideration.
Traditional corrosion monitoring techniques are based on using corrosion coupons, test
spool pipe segments, or electrochemical measurement procedures.
6.2.1 Corrosion Coupons
Corrosion coupons are metal specimens made of the system metallurgy that are
carefully prepared, weighed, and inserted into the system at a point where they are
exposed to the system water under conditions that simulate the operating conditions of
the system (for example, stagnant or intermittent flow). They are exposed for a period
of time that is dependent on system operation, but for a period of not less than 90 days.
After exposure, the coupons are removed, cleaned by specified procedures, and re-
weighed to determine their weight loss. The weight loss is used to calculate a general
corrosion rate.
The corrosion rate is expressed in units of mils per year (mpy) or millimeters per year
(mm/y). Coupons can also be inspected for the presence of pits and pit depth.
However, the absence of pits on the coupons does not necessarily mean absence of
pitting in the system.
Insertion of the coupons into the system is usually achieved by installing a side-stream
corrosion coupon rack constructed of noncorroding materials such as PVC.[5,6] The
location of the coupons should be arranged so that failure of the coupon will not
obstruct FPS piping. Under optimized testing situations, coupons of differing
metallurgy should not be installed in the same rack. If only one rack is available,
6-4
ferrous metals should be located upstream from nonferrous metals. For example, the
sequence should be carbon steel and stainless steel, followed by copper alloys and
other nonferrous materials.
Variations of the conventional corrosion coupon configuration include coupons with
weld seams, stressed U-shaped coupons, and sandwich coupons. The latter are two
coupons clamped together, separated by an elastomeric gasket material to provide
anaerobic inner surfaces. The extent of corrosion using sandwich coupons is measured
by making weight loss determinations, determining the amount of surface area on the
inner surface that is involved with pitting, and measuring maximum pit depth.
Corrosion coupon techniques are relatively uncomplicated to use. The procedure
provides historical data that can be used for assessing the overall conditions related to
the potential for corrosion to occur. However, the corrosion rates measured should not
be considered as those that are occurring in the actual system. At best, the rates can be
considered as a reproducible estimate of the relative corrosion rate occurring under a
given set of conditions.
6.2.2 Test Spool Pipe Segments
Performance monitoring by use of test spool pipe segments is based on installation of
pipe segments in the system, preferably at sites where corrosion has been found
previously. Installation is done to provide the capability of removing the pipe segments
from the system in a design where the segment can be removed and examined
periodically without requiring that the FPS be taken out of operation. This can be done
by making flanged installations at a point where an alternative bypass line can be put
into service as the test spool is removed for examination.
Test spool pipe segments can be new pipe or pipe removed from the system that
already has shown signs of corrosion. Assessment of performance is based on visual
inspection and other criteria used to compare the current condition of the pipe segment
to the previous inspection. This procedure is done over a relatively long time period;
therefore, the use of photographs taken at the time of inspection is very useful.
The test spool technique is especially useful in performance monitoring the progress of
an on-line, long term, chemical treatment mitigation program. It also provides an
excellent site for collecting samples for microbiological fouling and chemical analysis.
The data gathered are considered as historical data.
Although not specifically considered a corrosion performance monitoring technique,
the use of test spool pipe segments provides specimens for examination by destructive
analytical procedures when necessary. This is usually associated with root cause failure
analysis.
6-5
6.2.3 Electrochemical Techniques
Adaptations of linear polarization

(LP) and electrical resistance (ER) measurement
techniques can be used to monitor performance of corrosion control methods in FPSs.
The LP measurements are based on the principle that a voltage impressed across the
conductive interface boundary will result in a current flow that is directly proportional
to the corrosion occurring on the metal electrode surface at the time of measurement.
The metal electrode, installed on a probe, is made of the same material of construction
as the FPS and inserted into a section of pipe or into a bypass corrosion coupon rack.
Available designs include models with two electrodes and three electrodes. Either
model has been used to give some indication of a pitting index. Data obtained by the
three electrode probe have been shown to be most able to correlate to actual pitting in
the system. Probes with electrodes that are flush with the piping wall are also available
and perhaps are more suited to use in an FPS. Results of the measurements are
expressed in units of mpy or mm/y.
Temperature and flow influence the corrosion rate measured by the probes. Therefore,
it is necessary to take measurements used for comparative purposes under similar
operating conditions. FPSs with high fouling tendencies and low conductivity are not
well suited for using LP performance monitoring techniques.
ER measures the resistance of a section of wire that is in contact with the FPS water. As
the wire corrodes, its cross-sectional area decreases, thus causing an increase in
resistance. This increase in resistance is measured over time and calculated into a
corrosion rate expressed in units of mpy or mm/y.
Both the LP and ER techniques provide data considered as real-time data.
Another electrochemical technique available includes probe devices to monitor
corrosion and biofouling.
1,2
Suppliers of these instruments should be contacted for
further information.
6.3 Fouling Monitoring Techniques
Fouling or siltation is the result of the deposition of solids being carried to low-flow or
stagnant sites during periods when water is flowing in the FPS. Generally, this is an
infrequent event. Perhaps the greatest source of fouling materials in FPSs is the

1
POEM Corrosion/Membrane Filtration Cells, CLI International, Inc., Houston, TX, USA.
2
Deposit Accumulation Test System DATS Unit, Bridges Scientific, Sandwich, MA, USA.
6-6
production of corrosion byproducts within the system. Often, fouling is a process
involved with the growth of slime-forming bacteria in the system.
There are no specific guidelines for the amount of fouling tolerated in FPSs. There are
no conventional fouling monitoring techniques that would be readily adaptable for use
in FPSs. Therefore, performance monitoring of fouling control methods is relegated to
making indirect observations. These indirect observations include:
Noting the loss of flow rate and increase of delta P.
Determining the frequency and cause of FPS component malfunction during
maintenance inspections.
Determining whether component malfunctions such as valve failure, plugging of
pressure gauges, system operation controllers, etc., detected during maintenance
inspections, could be related to lack of fouling control.
Performing visual inspection of stagnant and intermittent low-flow sites when
accessible.
Sampling periodic first-flush water from drop-legs, system drain points, and fire
hose standpipes to subjectively determine the amount and composition of sludge
collected at the discharge points.
Examining the composition of materials deposited on surfaces of biofouling
monitoring equipment. Examination should include chemical analysis and
comparing the ratio of organic to inorganic material in the deposits.
Interpreting data obtained during microbiological monitoring related to the
presence of slime-forming bacteria and filamentous microorganisms to indicate the
potential for fouling.
Collectively, the observations suggested above should provide some idea as to whether
a fouling problem potentially exists. These observations should be made at the same
frequency required for an effective maintenance inspection program. Unfortunately,
these observations are subjective data and are historical in nature. In the absence of
real-time and objective performance monitoring data, an engineering judgment of the
condition of the system must be made. When doing this, it must be recognized that
performance monitoring of system fouling may provide results only after the fouling
conditions have reached a potentially critical level.
6-7
6.4 Microbiological Growth Monitoring Techniques
Monitoring the growth of microorganisms in the FPS is important because of the impact
that microorganisms have on corrosion and fouling in the system. Effective control of
MIC (prevention mode) can be achieved only when the growth of microorganisms is
maintained below a critical level. When that critical level is exceeded, control is lost,
and most likely a mitigation program will be required. Effective performance
monitoring is essential in preventing the loss of microbiological control. Elements of
microbiological monitoring techniques include:
Microbiological analysis of planktonic populations in the bulk water, including
makeup water
Analysis of sessile colonization
Determination of aerobic tuberculation formation
The detailed test procedures for doing planktonic microbiological analysis, sessile
colonization analysis, and selective culturing to detect specific types of microorganisms
are described in Section 8.
Typically, selective monitoring for specific types of bacteria associated with MIC or
fouling does not require additional testing if the procedures for examining planktonic
and sessile populations include selective isolation.
6.4.1 Planktonic Microbiological Analysis
Analysis of the FPS bulk water and the water used to maintain the required water
volume will not give a direct indication of the conditions related to existing MIC or
biofouling problems. The tests will indicate only the general microbiological conditions
of the bulk water. In many cases, however, bulk water analysis provides a reliable
indication of general conditions of microbiological control trends. It may indicate that a
significant change in the microbiological macroenvironment has occurred that could
have an effect on the microenvironment within the sessile colonization.
Unique to FPSs, samples should be taken from both stagnant sites and flowing sites
when possible. Stagnant sites would include first flush water from drain lines, fire hose
standpipes, and maintenance inspection points. Flowing samples can be taken from
these sites as well after flushing for approximately three minutes. Samples should be
taken from as many sites in the system as possible. Sampling at least five sites located
from the beginning of the system to the farthest point from the makeup source is
suggested.
6-8
Samples of the makeup water should be taken at the point where it is added to the
system. If the system has a makeup storage water tank, samples should be taken at the
discharge of the tank. Makeup water samples should be taken in duplicate to minimize
potential sampling errors. Samples should be cultured in triplicate. Supplemental
sampling at more frequent intervals may reduce the need for duplicate sampling and
triplicate culturing. Selective media should be used to detect the presence of the
following:
Total aerobic bacteria
Total anaerobic bacteria
Sulfate-reducing bacteria
Metal-oxidizing bacteria
Acid-producing bacteria
Slime-forming bacteria
A variety of test kits are available that can be used to determine the presence and
relative numbers of these bacteria. A description of the selective media and the
culturing procedures used for these tests, when test kits are not used, is provided in
Section 8.
The data obtained from bulk water analysis must be interpreted on a trending basis.
Significant differences are those that are at least 2 orders of magnitude, for example, a
change from 1 x 10
3
to 1 x 10
5
. Replications should agree to 1 order of magnitude.
Microbiological analysis of the bulk water should be done at a frequency of at least
once every six months. In systems where there has been MIC or fouling in the past, the
frequency should be at least once every three months for a year.
6.4.2 Microbiological Analysis of Sessile Colonization
The formation of sessile colonies on surfaces within the FPS is generally of more
concern than the planktonic populations. However, performance monitoring of sessile
populations is more complicated than planktonic analysis. The major difficulty is access
to the sites where sessile colonies form in the system. To overcome this difficulty,
installation of strategically located biofouling monitors can be used. There are several
designs of biofouling monitoring devices. The basic similarity is that an accessible
surface is provided that is ideally suited for microbiological colonization to occur.
Conventional biofouling monitors can be adapted for use in FPSs operated under
stagnant flow conditions. Screened coupons, similar to corrosion coupons, can be
6-9
inserted into a corrosion coupon rack, when available. Holders containing several small
beads made from system materials can be inserted in to the system, usually at a water
discharge point. The beads provide a site for sessile colonization. More sophisticated
monitoring devices can be adapted for FPS use
3,4
monitor but are usually not required.
Biofouling monitors based on measuring -temperature or -pressure are not readily
adapted for use in FPSs.
With each of these biofouling monitors, it is necessary to retrieve the sessile growth
surface and remove the biomass for analysis. In some cases, the performance
monitoring is based on quanitizing the mass or weight of biomass that has accumulated
on the test surface. In other cases, it is based on the population density of
microorganisms per unit of surface area. The values obtained from microbiological
analysis of sessile colonization are generally expected to be greater than those obtained
from planktonic monitoring.
The Swab Sampling and Culturing Procedure described in Section 8 can be used to
remove and culture the biomass. It simply involves wiping the test surface with a
sterile swab and directly culturing the material collected on the swab. Typical sites
where swab sampling can be used include test surfaces of biofouling monitors or at
system water sample points. When accessible, test spool pipe segments and the surface
of corrosion coupons can be used. The samples are cultured on the selective media
discussed with testing planktonic samples. Quantitative results can be obtained by
using dilution end-point procedures. Other methods to remove the sessile biomass
include scraping or ultrasonic removal.
The frequency of sessile colonization performance monitoring is system specific and
depends on system operating conditions. However, it is suggested that tests be done at
least once every three months. The results from these tests are interpreted on a trending
basis.
6.4.3 Tuberculation Analysis
Performance monitoring of the extent of tubercle formation on system piping surfaces
is an indirect monitoring procedure. However, it is a very important condition to
monitor because of the impact that tuberculation has on FPS flowrates in small ID pipe,
MIC, and underdeposit pitting corrosion.

3
CorrDats Unit, Bridges Scientific, Sandwich, MA, USA.
4
BIo-George Monitor Structural Integrity Association, San Jose, CA, USA.
6-10
Monitoring must be done by visual inspection. Documentation is important and can be
in the form of written description and photographs. Sections of small ID pipe (< 2.0
inches [< 5 cm]) should be removed and inspected for degree of blockage and tubercle
formation. The installation of test spool pipe segments discussed earlier is a distinct
advantage for this type of monitoring. Samples of the tubercles can be collected when
the system is opened. Samples should be examined immediately using microscopic
techniques, as described in Section 8, to confirm that metal-oxidizing bacteria such as
Gallionella sp. are responsible for the formation of the tubercles. Surfaces under the
tubercle can be examined to detect pitting caused by SRB or underdeposit pitting
mechanisms.
It is suggested that tuberculation analysis be done at least annually or as often as the
system is opened.
6.5 Other Performance Monitoring Techniques
6.5.1 Internal Visual Inspection
Visual inspection is an important tool in performance monitoring. Visual inspection of
the internal sites of the FPS should be made at every opportunity. Inspection techniques
may include boroscope inspection and remotely operated video equipment. Internal
visual inspection should include documentation of the observations made.
6.5.2 Nondestructive Evaluations
A number of mechanical/electronic techniques have been adapted for use as on-line
monitoring of FPSs. Two of these techniques that have been employed with some
degree of usefulness are ultrasonic testing (UT) and radiographic testing (RT). UT and RT
are labor intensive and expensive, which limits their use as a performance monitoring
method in FPSs.
UT is a nondestructive method for characterizing wall thinning of piping. The tests can
be made from the outside of the pipe so they can be done without taking the FPS out of
service. UT testing may be useful in detecting localized corrosion when adequate
inspection locations are selected and inspection grids are sufficiently fine. Slight wall
thickness losses are difficult to detect by UT. A major advantage of UT is that the
system does not have to be drained. A major disadvantage is that geometric
discontinuities, such as welds or the presence of tuberculation, require specialized
interpretation that must be confirmed by visual inspection at some point in time.
RT consists of penetrating the component (piping) with ionizing radiation and
capturing an image on a film similar to an X-ray or on an electronic sensor similar to a
6-11
video screen. Typically, RT requires that the component be drained. Although not
widely used in FPSs, in certain cases, RT nondestructive examination may have
application as a performance monitoring technique. A relatively recent report has been
made in the literature [7] concerning NDE procedures for monitoring corrosion on
internal surfaces of carbon steel storage tanks, pressure vessels, and large and small OD
piping. The technology is based on low-frequency electromagnetic technique (LFET)
measured on the OD surface of the component.
6.6 Corrosion or Fouling/Leaks Performance Tabulation
The tabulation of the frequency and location of corrosion or fouling conditions such as
the occurrence of leaks is not considered a specific procedure to be done as a
performance monitoring activity. However, tabulation of these observations as they
occur provides an important insight as to the condition of the FPS and the performance
of the treatment program being used to control or mitigate corrosion and fouling.
Generally, the inspection for leaks or other corrosion or fouling conditions is part of the
maintenance inspection procedures discussed in Section 2. It is discussed here because
the information provided by these inspections should be used to interpret data
obtained from several of the other elements included in the performance monitoring
program.
Inspection for corrosion or fouling is usually done by visually inspecting the piping,
valve connections, threaded unions, weld seams, etc. When the system is being
inspected for leaks, it may not be necessary to actually observe water leaking from the
component. Evidence of deposits accumulating on the exterior surface of the pipe or
around joints, flanges, or welds can be sufficient to indicate that leaks are present or
have occurred earlier. If patches or spots of paint failure are observed and a spot of
surface rust exists on the pipe exterior where the paint has flaked off, it is probable that
a pit, close to the point of through-wall penetration, exists on the interior surface of the
piping.
Other observations that should be included in the tabulation of corrosion or fouling
conditions include loss of FPS water pressure, observed by recording pressure gauge
readings, observing the amount and frequency of makeup water addition and
frequency of jockey pump operation. When the addition of makeup water to the system
is excessive or a chronic pressure loss cannot be rationalized by system operation, it
may be likely that leaks are occurring at a point such as in buried lines.
6.7 Chemical Analysis Performance Monitoring Criteria
The primary purpose of chemical treatment of FPS water is to prevent corrosion and
fouling in order to maintain the system in a constant functional status for its design life
span. The specific treatment program is based on the chemical characteristics of the FPS
6-12
water when the treatment was made. If the chemistry of the water changes at some
point after treatment is made, it is possible the treatment program is no longer
appropriate, and adjustments may be necessary to ensure that performance
specifications are being met. Chemical analysis of the treated water in the FPS is
necessary to detect if chemical changes have occurred and if adjustments are required.
Chemical and physical criteria to be tested should include:
pH
Conductivity
Presence of H
2
S or suspended metal sulfides (smells like rotten eggs)
Qualitative appearance of FPS water, which might include changes in color and
turbitity
Concentration of treatment chemicals
In most cases, the performance of the treatment chemicals is related to the initial
concentrations added to the system and the residual concentrations in the FPS water
after a period of time. To ensure that the treatment specifications have been met,
chemical analysis of the FPS water should be done immediately after treatment and on
a routine basis following the treatment period. The analyses required are the initial
concentrations and the subsequent residual concentrations of the treatment chemicals. It
should be noted that it may not be possible to measure residual concentrations of some
chemicals in FPS water. In this case, it may be necessary to use indirect analytical
procedures. Analytical procedures for some of the specialty treatment chemicals, such
as certain types of biocide/biostats/and corrosion inhibitors, should be provided by
vendors.
6.8 Data Trending
Performance monitoring is the gathering of both historical data and real-time data as
discussed earlier. The tabulation and trending of both types of data are important parts
of performance monitoring. The data to be trended depend on the system design,
treatment program, system operation, and the monitoring procedures being used.
Trending data should be focused on control parameters, diagnostic parameters, and
system performance. The purpose of the trending is to detect and often to anticipate
corrosion or fouling. Therefore, an important part of trending is to use the data
obtained. They should not be tabulated, then put into some storage facility, and
perhaps reviewed later only when a corrosion or fouling event occurs. Computer data
logging and spreadsheet diagnostic software programs have been developed to
facilitate and enhance the value of trending performance monitoring data.
7-1
7
REFERENCES
1. Recommended Cleaning Practices for Service Water Systems, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
December 1997. Report TR-108923.
2. R.W. Lutey and G. Lozier, On-line Chemical Cleaning for Once-Through Service
Water Systems, presented at the EPRI SWS Corrosion Seminar, Clearwater Beach,
FL (April 1992).
3. Handbook of Biocides and Preservative Use. H.W. Rossmoore, ed., Chapman & Hall,
New York, NY 1995. Chapter 3.
4. Enzyme Technology: A Tool for the Prevention and Mitigation of MIC, Paper No.
97-71, presented at the International Water Conference, Pittsburgh, PA (October
1997).
5. Cooling Water Treatment Manual. 3rd Edition, Section 5, National Association of
Corrosion Engineers International, Houston,TX. TPC Publication No. 1.
6. Standard Method for Conducting Coupon Tests in Plant Equipment. ASTM, Philadelphia,
PA. ASTM G4-84.
7. S. Ramchandran, OD Pipe Scanning Using Electromagnetic Technique for Internal
Flaw Evaluations, presented at the EPRI Service Water System Improvement
Seminar, EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC (June 1998).
8. H. H. Uhlig, Corrosion and Corrosion Control. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY,
Fourth Printing, 1967. P. 58.
8-1
8
APPENDIX A: MICROBIOLOGICAL SURVEY
PROCEDURES
I. Background
The microbiological survey procedures discussed in this appendix are an assembly of
procedures taken from numerous sources including those published by the American
Society of Testing Methods, American Petroleum Institute, National Association of
Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, American Water Works Association,
Society of Industrial Microbiology, and the American Society of Microbiology. Many of
these procedures have been modified and revised to meet the needs and requirements
of surveying microbiological conditions in industrial water systems such as FPSs. They
are not intended to be considered as standard methods that comply with any specific
quality assurance specifications. They are provided simply as proven guidelines, based
on industry experience, to assist the plant in the evaluation and treatment of corrosion
and fouling in fire protection systems.
On-Site Visual Examination of Accessible Components
This is usually done during an outage or when a specific component is taken out of
service. The latter may be associated with a maintenance shutdown or with an off-line
inspection/performance testing of redundant components. Timing these examinations
with the cooperation of operations and maintenance personnel is very important. It is
also very important to make the visual examinations and collect water samples
immediately as the system is taken out of service.
Color photographs are made of the sites inspected to provide documentation of the
conditions observed. Very often, the visual inspection is concurrent to other NDE tests,
such as eddy current and ultrasonic measurement. The NDE tests may be done by
utility personnel or outside subcontractors.
Visual inspection of the internal surfaces of the FPS is done by using a pneumatic 360
video boroscope. The video probe is attached to a VCR so that the conditions found
Appendix A: Microbiological Survey Procedures
8-2
inside the system can be recorded. Color photographs are made from the views shown
on the video monitor.
As the visual examinations are made, samples of water and deposits are collected at the
various sites inspected. Swab samples are taken from the wetted surfaces and
subsequently cultured on selective media discussed later. Microbiological analyses and
chemical analyses are made on samples collected during the visual inspection.
On-Site Microscopic Examination
Samples of deposits, residual corrosion products including tuberculation, and biomass
collected from the surfaces of the accessible wetted surfaces are examined
microscopically. A compound light microscope at 1000 X with selective microbiological
stains are used to characterize the composition of the deposits. Selected slide
preparations are used to provide photomicrographs of microorganisms potentially
involved with MIC.
On-Site Microbiological Culture Tests
Microbiological culturing tests should be made on-site immediately as the samples are
collected from the accessible wetted surfaces. Cultures are made from swabs and
deposits. Selective media culturing procedures are used to isolate microorganisms
associated with MIC and fouling. The selective media include:
Cetrimide medium for Pseudomonads and slime-forming, metal-oxidizing
bacilli and cocci (SMOB)
TGEA medium for slime-forming bacteria (SFB)
API medium for sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB)
Gallionella medium for iron-oxidizing bacteria (IOB)
Nitrate medium for ammonia-producing bacteria (AMP)
Nitrite medium for selective acid-producing bacteria (NPB)
Enriched Clostridia medium for hydrogen- or acid-producing anaerobic bacteria
(APB)
NOTE: Other medium and culturing procedures may be done, based on the
needs identified by microscopic examination of the deposits or other means.
8-3
The selective growth media suggested here are to be considered generic formulas for
the selective isolation of the types of microorganisms listed. Other media formulations
may be used as alternatives when it has been established that the alternate formulation
will do the same selective cultivation.
A number of commercially available field test kits have been developed for use in
conducting on-site microbiological surveys. Some have the capabilities of detecting and
enumerating the microorganisms for which the selective growth media are used. A list
of these test kits is provided later in this document.
Deposits and Metallurgical Analysis
Chemical analysis is made of the residual corrosion products and deposits found at the
corrosion sites. Analysis of the deposits includes both organic and inorganic
composition. Metallurgical examination is a destructive failure analysis to determine
the mechanism of component failure. Analytical procedures include:
Procedure Acronym
Fourier transformed infrared FTIR
Infrared spectrometry IR
Gas chromatography GC
Liquid chromatography LC
High performance liquid chromatography HPLC
Inductive coupled plasma ICP
Scanning electron microscope energy dispersive x-ray SEM-EDX
Organic deposit analysis
Direct analysis by FTIR
Solvent extraction by IR, GC, LC, HPLC
Inorganic deposit analysis
Direct analysis by wet chemistry procedures or ICP
Ash analysis by ICP
8-4
Specific anion detection
Direct analysis by SEM-EDX or wet chemistry procedures for chlorides, sulfides,
and phosphides, etc.
Metallurgical analysis
Destructive procedures to determine failure mechanism of component by ICP, SEM-
EDX and x-ray radiography
NOTE: The extent of metallurgical failure analysis is determined by the availability of
specimens and the data required to determine the root cause of the failure.
Water Chemistry Analysis
Samples of the bulk water are routinely analyzed using standard water analysis
methods. Criteria to be tested should be established and a list attached to appropriate
reporting documents.
Report of Observations and Results
The observations made during the survey, as well as the results of the various tests
done both on-site and in the laboratory, are used to present an interpretation of the
situation, for example, probable potential for MIC or the root cause of the component
failure. The discussion provides a basis for further action and the development of a
program for the prevention and/or the mitigation of an existing MIC situation.
II. Description of Test Procedures
Microscope
Objective - To describe the type, function, and care of the compound microscope.
Type - The bright-field compound microscope can be used both on-site and in the
laboratory. Table 8-1 provides the recommended optical specifications.
8-5
Table 8-1
Optical Specifications
Numerical
Aperture
Total (N.A.)
Common
Name
Objective
Magnification
Eyepiece
Magnification
Total
Magnification
0.09 Scanner 4X 10X 40X
0.25 Low Dry 10X 10X 100X
0.65 High Dry 40X 10X 400X
1.25 Oil Immersion 100X 10X 1000X
It is important that the resolving power of the microscope be checked at all
magnifications by observing stained objects of an approximate known size. For
example, fungi should be easily distinguished at about 100X, large bacteria at 400
500X, and small bacteria should be satisfactorily resolved at 9501000X (oil immersion).
Function - The microscope is composed of three optical systems and a light source;
each of the systems contributes to the final resolving capacity of the microscope and has
a primary function that is complemented by each of the other systems. The main
functions of each part of the optical system of the bright-field microscope are outlined
below:
1. Objective lens
a. To gather light coming from any part of the object
b. To unite this light in a point of the image
c. To form the image at such a distance that magnification is obtained
2. Eyepiece (Ocular Lens)
a. To form on the retina a real image of the actual image from the objective,
sometimes referred to as a virtual image
b. To magnify the real image formed by the objective
c. To image ocular micrometry devices, pointers, etc., which are located in
the eyepiece
8-6
3. Condenser
a. To concentrate light upon the object and increase the brilliancy of the
image
b. To furnish oblique dark-field illumination where applicable
4. Illuminator
To furnish a visible light source
Care - The microscope represents a considerable investment and, with proper care,
should function satisfactorily for many years. A microscope is useful only when it is
working properly. Some of the primary considerations in care and maintenance of the
microscope are as follows:
1. Objective Lens
a. Avoid making contact with the slide by first focusing at low
magnification (10X) on a prominent object in the field with the coarse
adjuster and then focusing with the fine adjuster until the desired detail is
found. This prevents the objective from touching the slide.
b. Guard against corrosive chemicals, acid and alkaline fumes, extreme heat
and cold, and mechanical shock. Optical glass and coated lenses are very
susceptible to surface alteration.
c. When cleaning the objective lens, use a soft, long-fibered paper, especially
made for cleaning lenses. Do not use paper with abrasive fillers or dirty
lens paper. If dust is on the lens, dampen the lens paper with distilled
water and wipe softly, then follow with a dry sheet of clean lens paper.
d. When observing materials in which contact is made with the objective or
in which fumes evolve, wash the lens with distilled water, wash it with
xylene (alcohol should not be used), and dry it. Immersion oil should be
removed from the objective immediately after completion of the
examination.
e. Keep objectives and eyepieces in place at all times except when preparing
the microscope for shipment.
f. Clean only the exposed surfaces of the objective lens. The interior surfaces
of the lenses are well protected and should remain free from dirt or fog
with typical use.
8-7
2. Eyepieces
It may be necessary to clean the interior surfaces of the eyepiece lens. However,
extreme caution should be taken to avoid contamination and breakage during
disassembly and assembly. Cleaning should be done with a clean lens paper and
a camel hair brush.
3. Condenser
Dust and scratches on the top surface of the condenser lens are particularly
objectionable because they may interfere with viewing of the specimen.
Therefore, the same diligent care should be given to the condenser lens as to the
other optical systems of the microscope. The condenser lens should be protected
from dust and corrosive materials. When immersion oil is used, remove the oil
immediately after completion of the examination.
4. Illuminator
a. When a bulb is to be replaced in the direct-illuminator type, efforts
should be made to obtain a bulb similar to that specified for the
illuminator. Resolution can be significantly impaired by an improper light
source.
b. If a reflecting mirror is used, the surface should be kept free of dust and
scratches.
Water Suspension Slide Mount Technique
Objective: To describe the method of mounting water-suspended specimens that can
be resolved without the assistance of microbiological stains.
Suspension Technique: This technique is applicable to the detection of algar, protozoa,
helminths, plant parts, etc., and some bacteria such as Gallionella and Desulfovibrio (often
found in fresh water).
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Microscope slides
2. Cover glasses
3. Medicine dropper
8-8
4. Dissecting needles
5. Petri dish
b. Mounting medium
Permount
2. Procedure
a. Place one drop of the water-suspended sample on the microscope slide.
When examining a dehydrated specimen or a nonaqueous deposit,
disintegrate it in water with dissecting needles. Allow it to soak for about
10 minutes prior to transfer to the slide.
b. Place a clean cover glass over the specimen, and press as close to the slide
as possible. Avoid air bubbles. If the specimen is bulky, Gurrs W. M.
Medium can be used. When the cover glass has been properly placed, the
slide is ready for microscopic examination.
Comments
The preparation of wet mounts is appropriate to microscopic examination of deposits
containing both microbiological and non-microbiological materials. Many deposits that
develop in aqueous systems are easily adapted to the wet-mount technique. One of the
most common faults in the preparation of microscope slides is applying too much
sample to the slide. The amount of sample needed to obtain a reliable diagnosis is no
larger than a pinhead.
When deposits are composed of several types of stable agglomerates, it is important
that a separate slide be prepared for each type.
Hanging-Drop Slide Mounts
Objective: To describe the hanging-drop technique and its application to microscopy.
The hanging-drop technique permits microscopic examination of living micro-
organisms suspended in a fluid. This provides the advantage of observing
microorganisms without distorting their morphological characteristics. One use of this
technique is the observation of motility, which is not apparent when using the simple
staining technique. This technique is also applicable to microscopic examination of
sulfate-reducing bacteria and iron bacteria in scale-like deposits.
8-9
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Deep-well slide
2. Cover glass
. Medicine dropper
b. Sealing materials
Vaseline or stopcock grease
2. Procedure
a. Rim the edge of the depression in the deep-well slide with a thin layer of
sealing material.
b. Place a small drop of the liquid containing the specimen to be examined
in the center of a cover glass that is positioned on a flat surface.
c. Invert the deep-well slide, and position it over the cover glass so that the
drop of liquid is directly in the center of the well.
d. Press the deep-well slide firmly onto the cover glass.
e. With a quick, smooth motion, invert the slide. If this step is performed
properly, a hanging drop will be formed on the cover glass.
f. The slide is now ready for microscopic examination.
CAUTION: Always begin observations on the low (10X) objective, and manipulate
carefully when changing to a higher magnification. The objective lens can be severely
scratched if the nosepiece is positioned too closely to the slide when changing to a
higher magnification. NEVER use the oil immersion lens when viewing a hanging-drop
slide.
Comments
When determining motility by the hanging-drop technique, care should be taken not to
confuse microorganism motility with Brownian movement. Brownian movement is an
irregular vibrating movement of suspended matter that remains relatively stationary in
the field; whereas, true motility is demonstrated by the ability of suspended
microorganisms to traverse a relatively stationary field.
8-10
When hanging-drop mounts are examined with the bright-field microscope, it is
extremely important to adjust the light source (by closing the diaphragm or lowering
the condenser) so that the maximum contrast of the image can be obtained.
Staining Procedures
Objectives: To determine and demonstrate the use of basic biological stains, as well as
those specific stains for spores, capsules, and slime layers.
Simple Stains
The term simple staining refers to the preparation of biological material for
examination by using only one stain to obtain the desired effect.
Clean slides are required for preparing satisfactorily stained mounts. New slides
should be handled only by the edges and polished with a piece of lens paper. Used
slides should be cleaned with detergent, rinsed with water, then with alcohol, and
dried.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
2. Cover glasses
3. Petri dish
5. Absorbent paper
6. 70% ethanol
7. Permount
b. Stains
1. Lactofuchsin
Acid fuchsin (dye content 57%) 0.1 gram lactic acid (85% reagent
grade) 99.9 grams
8-11
After mixing, allow to stand overnight and filter. This stain should be
replaced after six months.
2. Crystal violet
Crystal violet (dye content 95%) 0.2 grams
Distilled water 88.8 grams
Dissolve dye in water.
2. Procedure
a. Lactofuchsin stain
1. Place a drop of water on the slide. If the sample is free of debris or is
a smear from a pure culture, disperse it gently in the water on the
slide. If the sample is bulky, disperse it by teasing with a dissecting
needle in water in a petri dish or water glass. Transfer a small portion
of the specimen to the slide.
2. After the specimen is dispersed properly on the slide, add a drop of
lactofuchsin stain. Mix the stain with a specimen. Heat gently to
increase the intensity of the stain. Use a drop of Permount instead of
water on the slide when excessive debris (fiber, filler, scale, etc.) is
present in the specimen.
3. Place a cover glass over the specimen, and gently press until the
excess liquid and air bubbles are expelled from beneath the cover
glass.
4. Carefully take up the excess liquid with a dry, absorbent paper while
the cover glass is pressed downward. If this step is not executed with
caution, the cover glass can become soiled, and reduction in
resolution can result.
b. Crystal violet stain
1. Proceed as in a. (1).
2. After the specimen is dispersed uniformly on the slide, add a drop of
crystal violet stain. Mix the stain with the specimen, and place a cover
glass on the specimen as outlined in a. (3) and a. (4).
8-12
Comments
Lactofuchsin - This stain is suitable for the initial microscopic examination of
microbiological deposits. It is specific for microorganisms and can be used without
excessive interference from nonmicrobiological materials in the sample, such as fibers,
organic materials, fillers, etc. Lactofuchsin stains microorganisms a red-to-pink color.
The color intensity is not great, so care must be taken to examine the preparation
thoroughly. Heat lightly, if required, to increase the intensity.
Crystal violet - This stain is a general purpose stain that gives a deep violet color. It is
not specific for microorganisms. The stain is excellent when morphological
characteristics of the specimen are desired.
Differential Stains for Endospores
Spores are highly refractile bodies of certain bacteria and are considered a resting stage
or protective stage in the life cycle. Spores may indicate that the population has
responded to unfavorable environmental conditions, such as exhaustion of nutrients,
the presence of metabolic waste products, or the presence of certain toxins.
Spores resist staining, which suggests two ways to detect them. Spores appear as clear,
round or oval, refractile unstained bodies surrounded by stained bacteria. To
substantiate this observation, a specific staining technique for bacterial spores should
be used.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Clean microscope slide
2. Alcohol burner or equivalent
3. Transfer needle
4. Forceps
b. Stains
1. Malachite green
Malachite green (certified) 5.0 grams
Distilled water 95.0 ml.
8-13
2. Safranine
Safranine 0 (2.5% in ethyl alcohol) 10.0 ml.
Distilled water 100.00 ml.
2. Procedure
a. Make a thin water suspension of the specimen on a microscope slide and
allow to dry; heat gently to fix the sample to the slide.
b. Flood the slide with malachite green.
c. Heat the stain on the slide to steaming, but not boiling, for two to five
minutes.
d. Wash gently in tap water until no more color is removed from the slide.
Since malachite green is readily soluble in water, this washing should
remove all color except that which has been occluded within the bacterial
spore.
e. Flood the slide with safranine, and allow to stain one minute.
f. Wash the slide gently in tap water, and carefully blot dry.
g. Examine the slide under oil immersion. Spores will appear green, as
contrasted to the nonspore vegetative cells, which appear pink.
Comments
Other differential staining techniques have proven useful for examination of
microbiological deposits. These include the Gram stain, acid-fast stain, flagella stain,
stain for droplets, and several differential staining procedures used to distinguish
specific types of microorganisms.
Capsule Stain
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Microscopic slides
2. Inoculating loop
8-14
b. Reagents
1. Capsule stain 1
2. Capsule stain 2
2. Procedure
a. Flame one side of the slide in the flame of a Bunsen burner to remove any
oil or grease. Allow the slide to cool.
b. Place a drop of 1% congo red solution (capsule staining solution 1) in the
center of the slide with an inoculating loop.
c. Transfer some of the bacteria to be used from the culture to the drop of
congo red solution on the slide. Mix.
d. Spread the drop of congo red solution containing the bacteria out over the
slide with your inoculating loop to form a thin smear about the size of a
nickel. Allow the smear to air dry. Do not heat fix the smear.
e. Cover the dried smear with capsule staining solution 2. Allow this solution
to remain in contact with the smear for two to three minutes.
f. Pour off the capsule staining solution 2, rinse the slide in gently running
water, and carefully blot the slide dry.
g. Examine the slide under the oil immersion lens of the microscope. The
background will stain a grayish color. The bacteria cells will stain red. The
capsule, if one is present, will not stain and will appear as an unstained
halo around the cells.
Dry-Mount Films
The preparation of specimens in dry-mount films is necessary for microscopic
examination when using certain simple and differential staining procedures. Dry-
mount films are best suited for the examination of bacteria because they are able to
withstand the drying better than are other microorganisms, such as filamentous fungi
and yeasts.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
8-15
2. Cover glasses
4. Medicine dropper
b. Reagents
50% aqueous ethanol
2. Procedure
a. Transfer a small portion of the specimen to a slide, and disperse evenly in
a drop of water.
b. If not already a liquid, mix the specimen with water or 50% ethanol.
c. Spread the liquid suspension of the specimen thinly over the surface of
the slide, and dry gently over an alcohol burner or other heat source.
d. If a concentrated film of the specimen is required, add several drops of
the liquid suspension of the specimen successively with a medicine
dropper to the surface of the slide, allowing each drop to dry before
adding the next drop on top of it.
Semi-Permanent Slide Mounts
This technique involves the use of Permount or a suitable alternative. Permount is
soluble in water and is useful in the preparation of permanent slides of specimens such
as fungal colonies and other plugging and fouling microbiological deposits.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
2. Cover glasses
4. Absorbent paper
8-16
2. Procedure
a. Place a drop of Permount on the specimen, which has been prepared and
readied for wet or dry mounting.
b. Carefully place a cover glass on the preparation without trapping air
bubbles.
c. Remove any excess medium by carefully blotting with absorbent paper.
Allow to dry for 10 minutes.
Comments
The use of Permount is recommended for the examination of materials that contain
significant amounts of silt, corrosion products, scale, etc., which tend to reduce
resolution and cause air bubbles to develop.
Swab Sampling for Culturing from Deposits and Surfaces
Objective: To describe the method for collection of samples of sessile biomass and the
transport of those samples to a site for subsequent microbiological analysis.
This procedure provides a fast, easy-to-use system for standardizing the collection and
transport of microbiological samples composed of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria,
fungi, and algae. It reduces the chance of contamination and breakage in transit. It
provides a simple means for removing and collecting biomass/biofilm from component
surfaces. Specimens stay moist and, in most cases, viable for up to 72 hours.
1. Materials
a. Sampling Apparatus
1. Aerobic samples
Precision Dynamics Culture (C.A.T.S.)
*

*
The indicated materials are typically available from local biological supply vendors. BBL is owned by
Becton Dickinson Co., a worldwide supplier of microbiological laboratory materials and equipment.
Edge Biologicals, located in Memphis, TN, is a supplier of microbiological laboratory materials that
custom manufactures and supplies items in compliance with specifications provided.
8-17
The C.A.T.S. culture tubes feature an all-plastic tube with modified
Aimes transport medium contained in a sealed chamber in the
bottom of the tube. Each collection swab consists of a plastic shaft
with a rayon tip, firmly secured to a high-density polyethylene cap.
The culture tube is bias cut for easy insertion of the swab. A control
number and expiration date are clearly printed on the outer
package. Shelf-life of the C.A.T.S. is up to two years when stored
below 30C.
The double C.A.T.S. system (two swabs per tube) is recommended
when the sample collection is to be used for multiple
microbiological analyses.
2. Anaerobic Samples
BBL Anaerobic Culturette Systems
The Culturette System contains one swab, two polyester pledgets,
prereduced Cary-Blair transport medium, and a gas-generating
system. The tube is encased in a clear plastic, gas-impermeable,
polyethylene bag environmental chamber. The tough outer wrap
protects the entire system and maintains sterility of the inner
contents. Shelf life of the Anaerobic Culturette System is up to two
years when stored below 30C.
The anaerobic samples will be cultured under anaerobic
conditions, as discussed later. These require equipment specifically
designed to use for anaerobic procedures. Several options are
available. These include:
BBL Gas-Generating Pouch Systems*
BBL Bio-Bag Environmental Chamber*
BBL GasPak 150 System*
b. Culture media
1. Aerobic
Gallionella media
(agar tubes with media solution overlay
Iron-oxidizing bacteria
Cetrimide agar (agar plates) Slime-forming bacteria
Tryptose glucose extract agar (TGEA)* Other slime formers
8-18
(agar plates) (nonselective)
Nutrient agar* (agar plates) Total aerobic bacteria
Nitrate broth* (broth tube) Nitrate bacteria
Nitrite broth* (broth tubes) Nitrite bacteria
Sabouraud dextrose agar* (agar plates) Fungi
2. Anaerobic
API media Sulfate-reducing bacteria
Thioglycollate medium* (broth tubes) Total anaerobic bacteria
Anaerobic agar* (agar plates) Total anaerobic bacteria
Reinforced clostridial agar*
(semi-solid agar vials/tubes)
Clostridial bacteria
2. Procedures
a. Sampling
Sampling sites must be selected to obtain representative samples. Ideally,
the sites should be swabbed immediately after draining or while the
component surfaces are still moist. When sampling sites that are
associated with the accumulation of sludge and/or substantial amounts of
biofouling, swabs should be made of both the outer surfaces and the inner
mass of the fouling material. The latter is done by plunging the swab into
the fouling material and swirling the swab at least 10 times before
retracting the swab.
If the sample sites become accessible only after the surfaces have dried, it
is necessary to rewet the surfaces with a minimum quantity of sterile
water and then wipe the surface with the swab. In some cases, it is more
convenient to prewet the swab with sterile water and then wipe the dry
surface.
In obviously aerobic environments, it is necessary to sample only for
aerobic samples. However, it is recommended to use both aerobic and
anaerobic sampling swabs for most situations. Unless multiple sampling
sites at relatively similar environments will be done, it is recommended
that replicated samples be taken. Individual swabs can be used to make
more than one isolation culture. However, when it is known that a
complete microbiological culturing will be done, it is recommended that
the double-swab aerobic system be used for each site sampled. Double-
swab anaerobic systems are not available.
8-19
Specific instructions for use of each of the swab systems are printed on the
outer wrappings. Other hints include trying to minimize the
accumulation of dirt, mud, and other non-biomass material on the swabs.
If sampling surfaces underneath tubercles, usually black in color, be sure
to get some of the black material on the swab. When sampling surfaces of
tubercles and corrosion products, be sure to get some of the yellow-
orange, red-orange materials on the swab. Be sure to saturate the swab tip
when wiping wet surfaces without any apparent fouling on them. On
surfaces that are coated with a film of biomass, wipe the swab onto the
surface of the base material and thoroughly saturate with the biomass.
Immediately after making the swab sampling, return the swab/cap to the
tube and follow the instructions for transport. Be sure that the tip of the
swab is in contact with the transport medium contained in the bottom of
the tube. Microbiological culturing should be done as soon as possible
after sampling (ideally within 24 hours and no later than 72 hours).
Refrigeration of the swab samples during transportation is typically not
necessary as long as the sample is not exposed to extreme temperatures,
for example, greater than 50C for more than 12 hours.
b. Culturing
The aerobic culturing procedures should be done first.
The first of these should be the streak cultures on agar plates of the
selective media listed previously.
1. Aerobic streak plates
The agar plate (cover removed) is held with the surface in a vertical
position with one hand. With the swab in the other hand, the tip of
the swab is spread in parallel streaks three or four times across the
surface of the agar, slowly rotating the shaft of the swab with the
fingers. The direction of the streaks should be changed three or
four times by rotating the dish during streaking. This manipulation
accomplishes a thinning out of the microorganisms on the surface
of the agar. When the streaking is properly performed, the
microorganisms will be sufficiently far apart in some areas of the
plate that the colonies which develop on the surface of the agar will
be the progeny of isolated cells.
Transfers from the individual colonies can be examined
microscopically and subcultured for further identification and
characterization.
8-20
2. Aerobic broth cultures
Duplicate swabs and/or the swabs used to make the streak plate
cultures can be used for broth culture procedures. The swabs are
removed from the transport tubes and inserted into the broth
tubes. The shaft of the swab should be swirled at least 10 times
while the tip is immersed in the broth. If the swab is not to be used
for further culturing, the tip of the swab should be left in the
Gallionella Culture medium.
The aerobic broth culture tubes should be loosely capped during
incubation. Growth of the microorganisms will appear as biomass
on the walls of the tube, as a sediment on the bottom of the tube, or
as a turbid suspension on the broth. The growth can be
subsequently subcultured and microscopically examined for
further identification and characterization.
3. Anaerobic streak cultures
Anaerobic streak cultures are made with the swab samples taken
and transported using the Anaerobic Culturette System. The
streaking/plating procedure is exactly as described for aerobic
agar plate culturing.
Immediately after streaking, the plates are inserted into the
anaerobic growth chamber, for example, Gas-Generating Pouch,
Bio-Bag Environmental Chamber, or the GasPak System, and
incubated at the appropriate temperature.
The isolated colonies that develop on the agar surface can be
subcultured and examined microscopically for further
identification and characterization.
4. Anaerobic semi-solid agar cultures
Anaerobic semi-solid agar cultures are made with swab samples
taken and transported using the Anaerobic Culturette System. In
most cases, the same swabs used to make the agar plate cultures
can be used to make the semi-solid agar cultures. This is done by
inserting the tip of the swab into the semi-solid agar medium and
swirling the shaft at least 10 times, slowly as to not entrain air into
the medium.
8-21
After removing the swab from the medium, the tube/vial is
completely filled with additional medium to displace any air. The
tube/vial is tightly capped and incubated at the appropriate
temperature.
It is suggested that the swab tip be left in the tube/vial when using
the API medium and reinforced clostridial agar (R.C.A.).
Growth of sulfate-reducing bacteria in the API medium is
indicated by the development of a black color diffusing throughout
the medium. This may take as many as 14-28 days. Growth of the
Clostridia in the reinforced clostridial medium is first indicated by
the formation of gas bubbles and subsequently the development of
a cloud or turbid appearance within the medium. Sulfide-
producing Clostridia will occasionally produce discoloration of the
R.C.A. and black sulfide discoloration on API medium.
5. Anaerobic broth cultures
Duplicate swabs and/or the swabs used to make the streak plate
cultures can be used for the anaerobic broth cultures. The swabs
are removed from the transport tubes and immediately inserted
into the broth tube. The shaft of the swab should be swirled at least
10 times while the tip is immersed in the broth. Care should be
taken not to entrain air into the broth. If the swab is not to be used
for further culturing, the tip of the swab can be left in the broth by
breaking the shaft just above the tip.
The anaerobic broth culture tubes should be tightly capped during
incubation. Initial indication of growth may be seen usually within
two to four days. It may appear as the development of gas bubbles
clustered on the tip of the swab or at the interface of the liquid
level in the tube. Growth may subsequently appear as biomass on
the walls of the tube, as a sediment on the bottom of the tube, or as
a turbid suspension in the broth. The growth can subsequently be
subcultured and/or microscopically examined for further
identification and characterization.
Comments
Samples suspected of containing microorganisms will usually consist of a mixed
microflora. The initial step in the analysis of the sample content is to culture all
organisms present.
8-22
Examination of microbiological deposit samples using culturing techniques should not
be done without accompanying microscopic examination. Many insignificant
microorganisms exist as part of the microbiological mass collected, and these will grow
when cultured, perhaps in greater numbers or more readily than the significant
microorganisms. This fact may provide misleading results. Microscopic examination of
the specimen, as well as culture examination, will help to establish the relationship
between specific kinds of microorganisms and deposit formations.
Isolation and Characterization of Microflora from Water Samples
Objective: To describe the method used to culture and isolate microorganisms in
makeup and circulating water. The microflora in circulating water is similar to that in
makeup water. The techniques employed differ only in the quantity of the sample
examined and in the degree of dilution necessary to make critical interpretations of
results.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Sterile sampling bottles
2. Dilution bottles (9.0 or 99.0 ml) with sterile water
3. Petri dishes
4. Pipettes (1.0 and 1.1 ml)
5. Loop inoculating needle
7. Incubator with heat capability up to 37C for 48 hours
9. Filter tube apparatus if applicable
10. Whirl-paks (sterile plastic bags)
b. Culture media
1. Nutrient agar
2. Mycophil agar
8-23
3. Stokes agar
4. Selective or differential media if applicable
5. Culture collection and transport tubes
2. Procedures
a. Sampling
Sampling points should be carefully selected to obtain representative
samples. Special precautions should be taken to obtain samples
containing a typical dispersion of material suspended in the makeup
water or circulating water to be examined.
When sampling water that contains dirt, mud, rust, or other debris that
will interfere with microbiological examination of the specimen, a portion
of the specimen should be collected through surface sampling.
Sterile sample bottles or Whirl-Paks should be used to collect and
temporarily store specimens. Samples should be kept at their original
temperature or chilled if temporarily stored. They should not be exposed
to direct sunlight or heated prior to examination.
b. Cultivation
1. Dilution of plating
Fresh water specimens to be examined that are relatively free of
foreign matter and are not suspected of being highly contaminated
may be plated without prior dilution. This is done by transferring
0.1 and 1.0 ml aliquots of each specimen directly to petri dishes.
However, when specimens appear highly contaminated, dilution is
necessary and is done by transferring 1.0 ml of the original sample
to a dilution bottle containing 9.0 ml of sterile water. The colonies
of microorganisms cultured from the original or diluted specimens
should not appear more dense in the petri dishes than countable.
2. Dilution by streaking
This procedure is suitable for more heavily contaminated samples.
By means of a loop inoculating needle, a portion of the specimen is
placed on the surface of a solid medium near the side of the petri
dish and is streaked or spread over the surface with an inoculating
8-24
loop. The specimen should be spread in parallel streaks, changing
directions on the surface of the medium by rotating the dish four or
five times during spreading.
After each series of streaks, the inoculation needle should be
flamed, cooled, and drawn through the streaks already on the plate
to produce a diluted population. If a sterile plastic loop is used, it
should be changed after each use. The third, fourth, or fifth series
should give the optimum isolation of microorganisms. This
manipulation accomplishes a thinning out of the bacteria on the
surface of the medium. When streaking is properly performed, the
bacterial cells will be sufficiently far apart in some areas of the dish
that the colony developing from one cell will not merge with that
growing from another. Each isolated colony is the progeny of a
single cell, hence, a pure culture.
3. Interpretation/characterization
The objective of the examination of specimens using dilution
methods of cultivation is to characterize the sample through colony
isolation. When this is done, microscopic examinations or
additional culture studies can be made to determine the individual
microorganisms isolated. The examination of isolates should prove
to be an important guide in planning for the best point of
application and selecting the product to be employed for
microorganism control, and the examination can often be useful in
locating the origin of microbiological problems.
Comments
Both the plating and the streaking techniques must be done using sterile conditions to
avoid misleading results because of contamination from the air, apparatus, and media.
The streaking method is usually more adaptable and more practical for culture
examination of microorganisms. However, in situations where the microbial population
is low, as in some makeup waters, it may become necessary to use the plate method.
Plate Count Method for the Enumeration of Microorganisms
Objective:
To describe the techniques used for the enumeration of microorganisms by the plate
count method.
8-25
Several new products/procedures for enumerating total aerobic populations in bulk
water samples have recently become available. These have proved to be easier, faster,
and require less supplies than the procedure described below. The PETRIFILM by 3M
is an example of these products; it has proven to be an effective procedure for
enumerating microorganisms in bulk water samples. Procedures for the use of these
products are provided by the manufacturers.
The following is used as the traditional procedure for enumerating bacteria populations
in bulk water samples and is generally known as the dilution plate count method.
Plating should be done in a room that is free from air currents and dust. The culture
media should be selected on the basis of their designed specificity for supporting
growth of particular types of microorganisms. Nutrient agar for bacteria, Mycophil
agar for molds and yeasts, and Stokes agar for iron-oxidizing bacteria are examples that
can be used.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Sampling containers (sterile)
2. Dilution bottles (9.0 or 99.0 ml)
3. Petri dishes
4. Pipettes (1.0, 1.1, and 10.0 ml)
6. Incubator with heat capability up to 37C for 48 hours
7. Quebec colony counter (if available)
8. Filter tube apparatus (if applicable)
b. Culture media
1. Nutrient agar
2. Mycophil agar
3. Stokes agar (Sphaerotilus agar) and broth
4. Cetrimide agar
8-26
2. Procedures
a. Dilution technique
The dilution technique is basically the same for the enumeration of all
aerobic and facultative aerobic microorganisms.
1. Place 1 ml of the specimen into a 9.0 ml or 99.0 ml sterile water
dilution bottle. Shake vigorously 40 times. This dilution is 1:10 in a
9.0 ml bottle or 1:100 in a 99.0 ml bottle.
2. Transfer with a sterile pipette 1 ml from the first dilution bottle to a
second dilution bottle and shake as before. The dilution is now
1:100 or 1:10,000.
3. Continue this dilution sequence using 9.0 and 99.0 ml dilution
bottles until the desired dilutions have been reached. Dilutions
should be selected so as to provide no less than 30 and no more
than 300 colonies per petri dish. Three 99.0 ml dilutions or 9.0 ml
dilutions are sufficient for most specimens collected. In the case of
potable/demineralized water, only one or two dilutions will
usually be required.
b. Plating technique
1. The 1.01.1 ml pipettes should be used to transfer the diluted
sample to petri dishes. The calculation of the final dilution is
obtained by transferring a specific aliquot from the dilution bottles
to the petri dish and multiplying by the dilution factor.
2. Only one pipette per sample is needed to transfer from the dilution
bottles to the plates, provided transfer is in reverse order; that is,
transfer from the highest dilution first, followed in sequence to the
lowest dilution.
3. Prior to transfer from the dilution bottles to the plates, the
appropriate culture medium should be cooled to 45C and kept
ready for pouring immediately after the transfer has been made.
The temperature of the medium is best maintained in a water bath;
this is especially important if many plates are to be poured. This
will provide much better colony distribution in the culture
medium. If the agar is too hot, the bacteria may be killed or
inhibited, and misleading results may be obtained.
8-27
4. After the transfer from the dilution bottles to the plates has been
completed, pour the appropriate culture medium into the plates to
a slight excess of what is needed just to cover the bottom of the
petri dish. If many plates are to be poured, drying of the specimen
and contamination will be reduced if the medium is poured after
transferring five samples. Agitate the poured plate with a rotating,
short, reciprocating motion until uniform distribution of the
sample is obtained. Allow the plates to solidify.
c. Incubation of plates
After the plates have solidified, they should be incubated in the inverted
position at the recommended temperature. Normal incubation time is 48
hours for most bacteria and from five to seven days for most fungi.
Incubation at environmental temperature is acceptable and usually
preferred although text books frequently recommend 37C for bacteria
and 28C for fungi.
d. Enumeration of microorganisms
1. Following incubation, remove the plates and count the number of
colonies on those plates from the dilution that provides between 30
and 300 colonies per plate. Plates that contain less than 30 or more
than 300 colonies are considered less accurate and should be
discarded.
2. Enumeration is based on the number of microorganisms per
milliliter of the original sample. Therefore, by counting the plate
that has 30 to 300 colonies, the total number of microorganisms per
milliliter of sample can be estimated by multiplying the number of
colonies times the dilution factor.
Comments
Example: You have taken a sample from the fresh water system at plant A for the
purpose of enumerating the bacteria present. You transferred 1.0 ml of this sample to
the first dilution bottle (dilution 1:10 or 1:100). This was further diluted, plated, and
incubated at 37C for 48 hours. Now you are ready for the final step in the enumeration
process. What is the bacterial population of the fresh water?
The average number of colonies per replicated plate was 165. After checking the
dilution factor for this plate, you find it to be 1:10,000, which means that the original 1.0
ml of sample taken from the fresh water system has been diluted 10,000 times.
Therefore, 165 (colonies on plate) X 10,000 (dilution factor) = 1,650,000 or 1.65 X 10
6
8-28
bacteria per milliliter. This, 1,650,000 is the estimated number of bacteria in 1.0 ml of
the fresh water sample.
Detection of Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria
Objective: To describe a procedure for detecting the presence of sulfate-reducing
bacteria. Sulfate-reducing bacteria may be classified as obligate anaerobes, which
propagate only in the absence of dissolved oxygen. The method of detection described
here involves a biochemical reduction of inorganic sulfates present in the culture
medium to hydrogen sulfide, which causes ferrous sulfide to precipitate, turning the
medium black. The culture method for the detection of sulfate-reducing bacteria has
proved to be highly effective. Because of the ease of handling and the convenience of
preparation, a 10 ml aliquot of API (American Petroleum Institute) agar culture
medium is recommended for detection of the sulfate-reducing bacteria. A discussion
pertaining to other testing procedures for the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria is
included in the annotated bibliography. A list of commercially available field test kits
used for the detection of SRB is provided later in this appendix.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Pipettes, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 ml
2. Spatula
3. Incubator, heat capacity up to 37C
b. Culture medium
API agar culture bottles
2. Procedures
a. Sampling liquids
1. Sampling procedures for water specimens previously described
should be used. Care should be taken not to aerate water samples
prior to testing.
2. Using a pipette, transfer approximately 1 ml of the sample to a 10
ml API agar culture bottle by inserting the end of the pipette to the
bottom of the culture bottle. As the sample is gently released from
the pipette, slowly withdraw the pipette from the agar so that the
8-29
sample is not exposed to air when the pipette is fully withdrawn.
This is an important step in obtaining viable cultures of obligate
anaerobic bacteria. If the 10 ml bottle is not completely filled after
adding the sample, fill it with API agar from another inoculated
bottle to displace the remaining air.
3. Cap the agar culture bottle tightly. Do not shake or aerate the
medium. If air bubbles are present, uncap and add more sample
until the culture bottle overflows. Recap and again check for air.
Repeat this process if necessary until no air bubbles are observed.
4. Place the bottle in an incubator at 37C ( 3C) and examine it
periodically for color change in the agar. Darkening of the agar
indicates the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria. Occasionally, a
positive reaction is received after 24 to 48 hours. When this occurs,
microscopic examination is required to confirm the results. Some
samples may require as long as four weeks incubation. Therefore,
the broth culture bottles should be held for a minimum of 28 days
before discarding.
3. Sampling deposits (slime)
a. Caution must be taken in transferring deposit samples from one site to
another. Aeration should be avoided during collection and testing. A
reliable sample containing a viable anaerobic microflora can be collected
by probing deep into the inner portion of the deposit. Transfer a small
portion of the specimen to the agar culture bottle immediately, and allow
it to settle to the bottom.
b. Cap the agar culture bottle, check for air bubbles, and incubate as
described above.
Comments
Efforts should be made to avoid aeration in the preparation of the medium and in the
transfer of the specimen to the API agar culture bottles. A slight amount of dispersed or
dissolved oxygen in the medium will reduce the viability of obligate anaerobic bacteria,
reducing the sensitivity of the test. Microscopic verification of positive reactions can be
made by preparing a hanging-drop slide of the dissolved portion of the medium.
Verification should be made immediately after a positive reaction has been obtained.
Desulfovibrio desulfuricans is the most common sulfate-reducing bacteria encountered.
Old cultures of this species fail to demonstrate the rapid, spiraling motility that is
demonstrated by an active culture.
8-30
Microscopic Examination of Microbiological and Non-Microbiological Deposits
Objective: To describe the procedure used for microscopic examination of deposits
collected in industrial process water systems.
Sample Preparation and Examination: Sample analysis depends on proper procedures
being followed and documentation of results and observations (refer to Appendix A,
Section II. Microscope).
1. Materials
a. Compound microscope
b. Microscope slides
c. Cover glasses
d. Dissecting needles
e. Petri dish
f. Absorbent paper
2. Procedure
a. Dilute the specimen with water in a petri dish. This immediately
demonstrates the solubility, dispersibility, and stability of the slime in an
aqueous medium. Record observations of general appearance of the
specimen. It is an important step in the examination sequence.
b. Examine the specimen by teasing with the dissecting needles. Those
materials that are dissolved or easily dispersed in the aqueous medium
usually have less influence on the formation of the deposits. However,
those fractions that remain stable as stringy, slimy, gelatinous
agglomerates are most likely to be associated with deposit formation.
c. Continue to wash the stable agglomerates until most of the water-soluble
and dispersible materials are removed.
d. Transfer a small amount to a clean slide. Prepare the slide using an
appropriate mounting technique and stain required.
e. Examine the slide under the microscope. Begin all microscopic
examinations at the lowest magnification. This permits an assessment of
the staining and can give a rough quantitative estimate of the microflora.
8-31
After the entire mount of the specimen has been observed at low
magnification (100X), begin interchanging with the high-dry objectives
until the desired field of identification has been found. Oil immersion will
be required to observe bacteria. Apply the oil only after the entire
specimen has been examined at lower magnifications and a specific field
has been selected for oil immersion observations.
Comments
Gross examination of a deposit can be used to give some preliminary indications
regarding the causative agent or mechanism of corrosion. However, if a microbiological
source is suspected, culturing techniques and microscopic examinations will be
necessary to verify the agent.
Membrane Filter Technique for Detection and Characterization of Microflora
Objective: To describe the use of membrane filters for the detection and examination of
microbiological contamination in industrial process water systems. The membrane
filter provides a tool for the rapid determination of the type and relative degree of
microbiological contamination in process water and, in specific cases, makeup water.
Unlike culturing techniques, the membrane filter provides immediate results. It can
demonstrate the presence of microorganisms such as fungi, bacteria, protozoa, algae,
helminths, etc., without the need of employing numerous types of culture media and
without several hours incubation.
Use of membrane filters involves passing a measured volume of water through the
membrane using a vacuum filtration funnel device. The microorganisms can then be
observed by microscopic examination of the surface of the membrane filter which has
been stained, dried, and cleared.
1. Materials
a. Apparatus
1. Suitable filter holders and membranes are available from Gelman
Instruments, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.; Millipore Filter
Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts, U.S.A.; and Membranfilter
Gesellschaft GmbH, Gottingen, West Germany.
2. Filter holder (Gelman glass filter funnel no. 4370; Millipore Pyrex
filter holder with stainless steel screen No. XX10-047-20; or
equivalent).
8-32
3. Membranes (Gelman membrane GA-6, pore size 0.45 micron,
diameter 47 mm; Millipore filters, 0.45 micron pore size, diameter
47 mm, type HA; or equivalent).
4. Filter flask, 500 ml, with vacuum tube and aspirator pump
5. Microscope
6. Subsurface sampling apparatus
8. Cover glasses
9. Sampling bottles, 1 liter
10. Graduated cylinder, 100 ml
11. Forceps
b. Stains
1. Picric acid - 1.0% picric acid in distilled water,
2. Acid fuchsin - 1.0% acid fuchsin in distilled water, prefiltered
c. Other
Immersion oil, nondrying
2. Procedures
a. Sampling
1. Sampling sites should be selected on the basis of the problems
being investigated. Generally, a complete survey of a process water
system requires sampling from the water source to its end use at
the farthest point in the system. Current, complete flow diagrams
of the water system will assist in the selection of points where
samples can be obtained.
2. When sampling a water system that contains dirt, fiber, rust, or
other types of suspended matter, it may be necessary to prefilter
the specimen while collecting it by using the filter tube apparatus.
8-33
This apparatus makes it possible to examine almost any aqueous
system by the membrane filter technique. If the system is highly
contaminated, smaller volumes or dilutions of the original
specimen may be necessary. Usually, a volume of 50 to 1,000 ml of
the undiluted specimen is adequate to make complete membrane
filter analysis of water samples.
3. The sampling equipment and filtering apparatus must be kept
clean and dry when not in use. When it is necessary to sanitize the
sample bottles and filtering equipment, rinsing with commercial
household liquid bleach (sodium hypochlorite or Javelle water) is
adequate. The equipment must then be rinsed with large amounts
of the water sample or with ethyl alcohol to remove the
hypochlorite.
b. Filtering and staining
1. If the funnel is not graduated, a graduated cylinder should be used
to provide measured volumes of each specimen filtered. When this
is done, it is possible to make relative comparisons of the degree of
contamination between samples. This technique is not
recommended for quantitative measurement of microflora
populations.
2. When the measured amount of water has been passed through the
membrane, relieve the vacuum in the filter flask. Gently flood the
surface of the membrane with the picric acid solution to fix and
preserve the microorganisms. Let stand for five minutes or more.
After the fixing period, apply a gentle vacuum to remove the
excess picric acid. Wash gently with water. Relieve the vacuum,
remove the membrane with forceps from the holder, and place it in
a petri dish face up. Flood the membrane with the acid fuchsin
stain for two to five minutes, depending on the intensity of staining
required to make a microscopic examination. It may be necessary
to repeat the procedure to obtain suitable staining.
3. After staining, the excess stain should be removed by gently
flooding the membrane with water or by gently dipping the
membrane in a beaker of water. Allow the membrane to dry
completely. Membranes can be dried at 100105C. It is now ready
for mounting.
4. Section the membrane with scissors. Portions of the stained
membrane can be stored for several months, thereby providing
8-34
permanent preparations of the specimen. Place a selected section of
the stained membrane on a microscope slide, and apply a drop of
immersion oil. The oil will clear the membrane if it is properly
dried. The cleared membrane should be completely transparent. If
not, further drying is necessary. Place a cover glass over the section
and examine microscopically.
c. Interpretation
1. The presence of microorganisms, scale, and other debris can be
observed by direct microscopic examination. Too much debris will
make microscopic analysis difficult. The type and amount of non-
microbiological material present should be noted. If there is too
much debris present, repeat the entire procedure using less water.
If much iron scale is present, repeat the procedure through the
fixing step (addition of picric acid), wash with 50100 ml of 6N
HCL, and proceed with staining as described.
2. Gross differentiation between fungi, filamentous bacteria,
protozoa, algae, and helminths can be made by examining
unstained preparations of certain specimens. However, more
detailed examination should be based on stained preparations.
Differentiation between microorganisms and non-microbiological
solids is facilitated by the staining procedure.
Comment
This technique is not considered applicable as a method for the enumeration of
microorganisms. The types of microorganisms (and frequently the kinds of non-
microbiological materials) present in the sample are the most useful and reliable
information to be obtained from the membrane filter technique. This knowledge can
often provide valuable guidance as to the source of microbial contamination and can
contribute to the establishment of the most effective deposit control procedures.
8-35
Procedures for Collecting and Transporting Water Samples
Sampling sites should be carefully selected to obtain representative samples of the
makeup water and the system water. Makeup water should be sampled at the point
where it is added to the system. If an addition is made from a water storage tank, it is
best to get the sample as the water leaves the tank and goes to the intake riser.
Sampling can also be done at the jockey pump. The system piping should be sampled:
Near the intake riser at the front end of the system
Midway in the system at a drain point on a cross main line or fire hose hydrant
At the farthest end of the system, usually at an inspection valve line
A sample approximately 1.0 liter in volume should be adequate for most testing,
including microbiological and chemical testing. Duplicate or triplicate samples are
suggested in some cases when testing is infrequent. In stagnant systems, a sample of
the first flush, as well as a sample flushed for two to three minutes, should be taken.
The water should be added to a clean (sterile if possible) container that has been rinsed
a minimum of three times with the water being sampled. The sample container should
be filled completely and the opening sealed tightly if the testing is to be done within
1224 hours after sampling. If sampling is to be postponed, the caps should be loosened
until it is necessary to tighten them for transportation to the testing lab. Suitable plastic
sample containers can be obtained from most biological supply houses.
Shipping/packaging kits are also readily available.
Samples can be maintained at ambient temperatures for up to 24 hours. If it is known
that testing will not be completed within 24 hours, the samples should be refrigerated.
Appropriate labeling should include the location, date (time), and identification of the
person doing the sampling. The sampling and any relevant observations (for example,
cloudiness, odor, particulate materials, foam) should be logged at the time of sampling.
For critical sampling situations, it is suggested that the pH be measured of an aliquot of
the sample. This can be compared to the pH at the time of testing and may indicate if
changes in the characteristic of the sample occurred between the time of sampling and
testing. If the sample is taken for microbiological testing off-site, transit time to the lab
should not exceed 24 hours.
Procedures for Obtaining and Transporting Pipe Samples
Pipe samples are usually obtained for purposes of system assessment or for failure
analysis procedures. In most cases, the interior surfaces of the pipe are of most interest.
Microbiological data, corrosion site morphology (visual appearance of pits or
tuberculation), and access to corrosion products for chemical analysis are the primary
8-36
purposes for examination of pipe samples. For these reasons, care must be taken not to
contaminate or compromise the sample when obtaining it or transporting it.
Pipe with an ID greater than 6 inches (15 cm) should be examined for microbiological
data on-site. The sampling should be done immediately after removing the pipe before
the interior surfaces are allowed to dry. Pipe with an ID less than 6 inches (15 cm) can
be transported to an off-site laboratory for examination. Prior to removing the pipe, it is
necessary to clean the exterior surface as thoroughly as possible. This can be done by
brushing and rinsing the dirt and debris from the pipe surface. Removing pipe at
threaded fittings or flanges is desired. However, if this is not possible, removing the
pipe test segment can be done with a cutting torch providing that approximately 12
inches (30.5 cm) of the pipe length is not significantly affected by the heat of the torch.
Band saws or hack saws can be used to cut the pipe. However, cutting fluids or
coolants should not be used because they readily contaminate the sample. If the
examination procedures require that the pipe segment be split lengthwise, this should
be done just before the examination is made. A metal cutting band saw without cutting
fluids or coolants may be used to split the pipe. Cutting torches should not be used.
Packaging small ID pipe is done by inserting the pipe, after the exterior surface has
been cleaned, into a piece of PVC pipe approximately 1/2 inch (1.3 cm) OD greater
than the pipe sample. If the pipe segment is going to be examined for microbiological
data, the ends of the PVC pipe should be sealed and filled with water from the system
from where the pipe sample was taken. This will prevent the sample from drying out
during transit. If no microbiological tests are going to be done, the pipe segment can be
wrapped in plastic cling wrap and then covered with aluminum foil. Conventional
packaging materials can be used for shipping.
Resources for Materials Used to Perform a Microbiological Survey of an FPS
The following is a tabulation of responses to EPRI PSE SWAP Survey No. 98-011,
requesting information about the use, source, and cost of microbiological test kits.
Test Kit Supplier Cost
Bio-Scan Betz Dearborn $1600.00
(measures ATP) 4636 Somerton Rd,
Trevose, PA
215/355-3300
HYCHECK Difco Laboratories, Inc. Refer to price list
#9046-36 17197 N. Laurel Pk. Dr
Livonia, MI 48152
734/462-8500
8-37
BART Test Kit Hach Co.
P.O. Box 608
Loveland, TX 80539-0608 Refer to price list
MIC kit FPS BioIndustrial Technologies, Inc. Approximately
40105 Industrial Park Circle $100.00 per test
Georgetown, TX 78626
512/869-0580
Rapid Check II Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. $ 163.00/10 kits
128 Sandy Drive
Newark, DE 19713
Easycult Comb Orion Diagnostica Ltd. Refer to price list
Easycult - S P.O. Box 83
83 12101 Espco, Finland
BBL Test Kits Becton Dickinson Microbiological Systems Refer to price list
7 Loveton Circle
Sparks, MD 21152
410/316-4000
Petrifilm Test Kits 3M Microbiology Refer to price list
Attention: 97-HC-603
Bldg. 275-5W-05
St. Paul, MN 55133-3275
800/228-3957
Caproco Caproco International, Inc. Refer to price list
Hydrogenase Test 217 Virginia Avenue
Conroe, TX 77304
Echa Smartge Echa Microbiology Ltd. Refer to price list
Echa Dip Slide Unit M210, Cardiff Workshops
Lewis Rd., Eat Moors
Cardiff, CF1 5EJ, U.K.
Several responders indicated that their resource for microbiological sampling and
culturing was a service provided by their water treatment chemical supplier The
culturing was done on-site or sent to a remote laboratory. Some plants do local
8-38
sampling and send samples to the corporate environmental or microbiological
laboratory. Other responders indicated that they do not use field test kits but purchase
microbiological supplies from specialty biological supply houses such as:
Edge Biologicals, Inc.
598 N. Second St.
Memphis, TN 38105
901/523-0034
Most of the major laboratory supply institutions, such as Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh,
PA, have adequate inventories of materials required to do a microbiological survey.
9-1
9
APPENDIX B: INDUSTRY EXPERIENCES
A number of plants have had experience in dealing with corrosion and fouling of FPSs
over the past several years. How these problems were identified and dealt with
provides a database from which other plants can draw knowledge and experience to be
used in dealing with their own situations. The FPS Guidelines Task Group recognizes
that much can be learned from the experiences of others even though the circumstances
may not be identical to any other plant. Therefore, the following discussions of a few
such industry experiences are provided as part of these guidelines. The discussions are
presented in the form provided to the Task Group, written and contributed by those
that have had the experiences, prior to the drafting of this document.
1.1 Fire Protection Raw Water System Corrosion and MIC Problems and
Effectiveness of Chemical Treatment Programs
Piping Description
The fire protection piping system includes an extensive network of underground
piping forming a loop around the plant (214 inch [5.135.6 cm] diameter, cement-lined
cast iron) and aboveground piping (112 inch [2.530.5 cm] diameter carbon steel). The
wet portion of the aboveground piping sizes range from 38 inch (7.620.3 cm)
diameter. The corrosion and MIC problems are mainly associated with the
aboveground wet portion of the carbon steel piping. Underground cast iron piping has
shown very little corrosion degradation.
Current Maintenance and Surveillance Program
Flow tests at various valve stations, hydrants, and hose stations are performed on a
scheduled basis. These tests provide a good measure of water supply capability at those
locations. By observing the discharge water stream, the presence of clam shells or
corrosion buildup in the system can also be determined. Corrective measures are taken
if degraded flow conditions are observed. Corrective measures may involve flushing,
cleaning, or pipe replacement. Also, if pipe leaks are identified, the leaks are patched or
pipes are replaced. In some cases, significant lengths of pipe sections have been
Appendix B: Industry Experiences
9-2
replaced to preclude recurring leaks in that section Essentially, pipe replacement
and/or leak repair is done on an as-needed basis.
Pipe Replacement History
The original pipe installations at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) are over 20 years
old. During this period, the majority of the pipe replacements have occurred only once
at any location. There are, however, a few exceptions. This shows that pipe degradation
has generally been a slow process occurring over a long period of time. In all
likelihood, piping should have to be replaced only once in the life of the plant. Figure
9-1 included in Attachment 1 shows a schematic layout of the plant fire protection loop
and depicts main headers that have been replaced or where currently leaks are present.
Chemical Treatment Program
Currently, a chemical treatment program for the raw service water is in place.
Chemicals are injected in the raw cooling water (RAW) suction header. The raw service
water (RSW) pumps take suction from this header and discharge into the high-pressure
fire protection (HPFP) headers and raw water overhead tanks located on the reactor
building roof. These tanks (10,000 gallons [37,854 liters] each) provide gravity flow into
the fire protection header when the fire pumps are not running. The normal RSW usage
(CCW pump bearing lubrication, HVAC systems, cooling tower lift pumps, service
connections, minor fires, tests and inspections, etc.) keeps the water flowing to and
from the overhead RSW tanks and thus distributing the chemicals to various sections of
the HPFP system. The tank level is maintained automatically by operation of the RSW
pumps. Therefore, means of limited chemical treatment is available through the RSW
system.
Fire Protection Pipe Inspections
The purpose of the pipe inspections was to determine the effectiveness of the chemical
treatment program and determine existing pipe conditions. Pipe inspection methods
included:
Review of flow discharge tests for any blockages due to clam shells, sediment,
deposits, etc.
Visual inspection of pipe insides during surveillances that involved removal of
strainer baskets.
Inspection of pipe insides during repair/replacement. (Repairs were required due
to pipe leaks, valve replacements, etc.)
9-3
Ultrasonic testing to determine pipe wall thickness at various locations in the
system (wet pipe headers).
Results of Fire Protection Pipe Inspection
Review of Flow Discharge Tests
Since the implementation of the chemical treatment program, significant improvement
has been noticed during flow discharge tests (that is, flows through transformer deluge
systems, hydrants, hose stations, etc.). Flow obstructions were minimal, indicating that
clam production is being effectively controlled. Some hose station locations showed
blockage; however, these were attributed to previously deposited clam shells.
Visual Pipe Inspections with Strainer Baskets/Valves Removed
During recent pipe inspections, by removing inline strainers baskets, check valve, etc.,
fairly good inside pipe conditions were noted with no deposition of clam shells.
However, there was some sediment/nodules buildup, indicating corrosion, MIC, and
pitting problems.
Visual Inspections during Pipe Repair/Replacement
Pipe repairs and replacements provided excellent opportunity to examine the pipe
insides. Most inspections revealed significant sediment/nodules buildup, indicating
under deposit corrosion, MIC, pitting corrosion, fouling, etc. Due to the presence of
extensive pitting corrosion, it was decided to perform ultrasonic testing at selected
sections of large wet pipe headers.
Ultrasonic Testing
A Work Request (WR # C 371710) was submitted to perform ultrasonic testing on
selected sections of large wet pipe headers. A 100% scan was performed on 12-inch
(30.5-cm) lengths of each identified pipe section, and the lowest readings were
recorded. The results showed significant pipe degradation due to pitting and reduced
wall thickness. The readings indicated that wall thickness in several locations was in
the range of 1560% less than the nominal wall thickness.
Recommendations
Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that extensive pipe replacement is due to
degraded pipe condition (regardless of the chemical treatment program). A suggested
9-4
pipe replacement program is provided in Attachment 1. Some immediate actions can be
taken to reduce leaks, corrosion, and MIC problems associated with the HPFP system
and are described as short-term actions. More permanent solutions are described as
long-term actions.
Short-Term Actions
Maintain the current level of chemical treatment.
Institute a flushing program to allow chemicals to reach various stagnant lines on a
frequent basis.
Minimize the flow of fresh raw water into the system (introduces oxygen, causing
internal corrosion buildup), for example, fire pump operation should be reduced,
fire protection system should not be used as service water, etc.
Long-Term Actions
Implement a fire protection pipe replacement program. This program will
effectively manage capital expenditure and reduce/prevent unanticipated down
time due to pipe failures. See Attachment 1 for a recommended pipe replacement
program and estimated costs.
A feasibility study to convert the existing raw water system to a potable water
system is included as Attachment 2. Based on the plant life and license extension
plans, this may also be considered as a viable option.
9-5
Attachment 1
High-Pressure Fire Protection (HPFP) Pipe Replacement
Evaluation And Cost Estimate
The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the current condition of the aboveground
HPFP piping serving the main plant areas (that is, turbine, reactor and diesel generator
buildings). The evaluation is mainly limited to fire protection headers, including some
large branch connections (stagnant lines) whose failure can render a significant portion
of the fire protection suppression systems inoperable. The assessment provides
suggested pipe replacement priorities and schedules. Timely pipe replacement will
effectively manage capital expenditure and reduce/prevent unanticipated down time
due to pipe failures.
The evaluation is based on :
Review of current leaks in the piping system
Review of Work Orders associated with leak repairs and pipe replacements
Walkdown and visual observation
Knowledge of past history of pipe replacements
The report includes a sketch showing the main HPFP headers, locations of present and
past leaks and sections of replaced piping. The tabulation provides pipe lengths,
current pipe condition, and suggested replacement schedules. Finally, the pipe
replacement cost is provided for each fiscal year for the next five years.
9-6
Service
Building
Unit 1 Turbine Building Unit 2 Turbine Building
3 4
1
Unit 3 Turbine Building
5
2
Unit 1
Diesel
Building
Unit 3
Diesel
Building
6
7
10
13
24
16
33
12"
(30.5 cm)
Supplies to: (typical each unit)
H
2
Seal OIl
RFP Oil Tanks 3A, 3B, and 3C
Turbine Head End
Main Turbine Oil Tanks
Hose Stations
23
14
25
Unit 1 Reactor Building Unit 2 Reactor Building
21
Unit 3 Reactor Building
22
4"
(10.2 cm)
12" (30.5 cm)
4" (10.2 cm)
RFP Oil Tanks (typical)
10" (25.4 cm)
10" (25.4 cm)
8
6"
(15.2 cm) 10" (25.4 cm)
6"
(15.2 cm)
Turbine Oil
Tank (typical)
11
4"
(10.2 cm)
30
3"
(7.6 cm)
8"
(20.3 cm)
27 4"
(10.2 cm)
3" (7.6 cm)
4"
(10.2 cm)
4"
(10.2 cm)
26
HPCI
15
8" (20.3 cm) 18 17
28
3"
(7.6 cm)
31 4" (10.2 cm)
32
To Hose Stations
8"
(20.3 cm)
29
AFFF Header
From RSW Tanks
8" (20.3 cm)
8"
(20.3 cm)
3" (7.6 cm)
HPCI
2-1/2"
(6.4 cm)
4"
(10.2 cm)
20
Pipe Not Replaced
Pipe Replaced
Pipe Leaks
Pipe Sections Identification #
Legend
19
To Hose Stations
12
12" (30.5 cm)
Figure 9-1
HPFP Main Headers Inside the Plant (Wet System)
9-7
Table 9-1
Pipe Replacement Recommendations
NO. DESCRIPTION LENGTH
(FT)
PIPE
REPLACED
CURRENT PIPE
CONDITION
SUGGESTED
PIPE
REPLACEMENT
FISCAL YEAR
1 12" (30.5 cm) YARD
CONNECTION
UNIT 2 TB
25 NO GOOD, NO LEAKS > 2001 -02
2 12" (30.5 cm) YARD
CONNECTION
UNIT 3 TB
25 NO MINOR LEAK AT
YARD PENETRATION
> 200102
3 12" (30.5 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U1 TB
175 NO GOOD, NO LEAKS > 200102
4 12" (30.5 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U2 TB
170 NO GOOD, NO LEAK
(LEAK IN 4" (10.2 cm)
H
2
SEAL OIL BRANCH
CONNECTION)
> 200102
5 12" (30.5 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U3 TB
6 10' (25.4 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER U1 TB
7 10" (25.4 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER U3 TB
8 10" (25.4 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U1 TB
150 NO GOOD, NO LEAKS
(LEAKS IN 6" (15.2 cm)
TURB. OIL TK. AND
TURB HEAD END BR.)
200001
9 10" (25.4 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U2 TB
170 NO LEAK PRESENT 200001
10 10" (25.4 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U3 TB
120 NO GOOD, NO LEAK
(LEAKS IN BRANCH
CONNECTIONS)
200001
11 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 1 TB
75 NO GOOD, NO LEAKS 199900
12 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 2 TB
75 NO LEAKS PRESENT 199900
9-8
NO. DESCRIPTION LENGTH
(FT)
PIPE
REPLACED
CURRENT PIPE
CONDITION
SUGGESTED
PIPE
REPLACEMENT
FISCAL YEAR
13 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 3 TB
75 60%
REPLACED
GOOD, NO LEAKS 199900
REPLACE
REMAINING
PIPE
14 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 1 RB
240 NO NO LEAKS (SIMILAR
U2/U3 HEADERS
HAVE SHOWN
SIGNIFICANT
DEGRADATION)
199899
15 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 2 RB
240 30%
REPLACED
REPLACE
REMAINING
PIPE
16 8" (20.3 cm)
NORTH/SOUTH
HEADER UNIT 3 RB
240 80%
REPLACED
REPLACE
REMAINING
PIPE
17 8" (20.3 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U1 RB
200 <10%
REPLACED
18 8" (20.3 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U2 RB
215 YES GOOD NO
REPLACEMENT
19 8" (20.3 cm)
EAST/WEST
HEADER U3 RB
200 YES GOOD NO
REPLACEMENT
20 4" (10.2 cm) AFFF
HEADER
UNIT 1
150 NO GOOD NO
REPLACEMENT
21 4" (10.2 cm) AFFF
HEADER
UNIT 2
150 50%
REPLACED
LEAKS PRESENT 199900
REPLACE
REMAINING
PIPE
22 4" (10.2 cm) AFFF
HEADER UNIT 3
150 50%
REPLACED
NO LEAKS 199900
REPLACE
REMAINING
PIPE
9-9
Table 9-2
Fire Protection Pipe Replacement Cost Estimate
DESCRIPTION PIPE
REPLACEMENT(FEET)
REPLACEMENT COST *
(DOLLARS)
12"
(30.5
cm)
10"
(25.4
cm)
8"
(20.3
cm)
6"
(15.2
cm)
4"
(10.2
cm)
3"
(7.6
cm)
199798 199899 199920 200001 >2001
ITEMS 29, 30, 32 & 33
- U 2 REACTOR BLDG
3" (7.6 cm) HOSE CON.
HDR.
4" (10.2 cm) HOSE
CON. HDR.
-U 3 REACTOR BLDG
3" (7.6 cm) HOSE
CON. HDR.
4" (10.2 cm) HOSE
CON. HDR.

30

305

230,000

ITEMS 14, 15,
16,17,28,31
-U1 REACTOR BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER
8"(20.3 cm) E/W
HEADER
4" (10.2 cm) (7.6 cm)
HOSE CON HDR
3" HOSE CONN HDR
- U2 REACTOR BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER
- U3 REACTOR BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER

640

20

425

940,000

ITEMS 11, 12, 13, 21, 22
& 36
-U1 TURBINE BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER
- U2 TURBINE BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER
(2) 6" (15.2 cm) BRANCH
CON.
(2) 4" (10.2 cm)
BRANCH CON.
4" (10.2 cm) AFFF
HEADER
-U3 TURBINE BLDG
8" (20.3 cm) N/S
HEADER
4" (10.2 cm) AFFF
HEADER

180

105

200

420,000

9-10
DESCRIPTION PIPE REPLACEMENT
(FEET)
REPLACEMENT COST *
(DOLLARS)
12" 10" 8" 6" 4" 3" 1997-98 1998-99 1999-20 2000-01 >2001
ITEMS 8, 9, 10, 23,
24, 34 & 37
- U1 TURBINE
BLDG.
10" (25.4 cm) E/W
HEADER
- U2 TURBINE
BLDG.
10" (25.4 cm) E/W
HEADER
- U3 TURBINE
BLDG.
10" (25.4 cm) E/W
HEADER
(2) 6" (15.2 cm)
BRANCH CON.
(4) 4" (10.2 cm)
BRANCH CON.
- U1/2 DSL GEN
BLDG.
3" (7.6 cm)
BRANCH CON.
- U3 DSL GEN
BLDG.
3" (7.6 cm)
BRANCH CON.
-8" (20.3 cm) RSW
CONNECTION
440 150 105 125 80 872,000
ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, & 7
-U1 TURBINE
BLDG.
12" (30.5 cm) E/W
HEADER
10" (25.4 cm) N/S
HEADER
- U2 TURBINE
BLDG.
12" (30.5 cm) YARD
CON.
12" (30.5 cm) E/W
HEADER
- U3 TURBINE
BLDG.
12" (30.5 cm) YARD
CON.
12" (30.5 cm) E/W
HEADER
10" (25.4 cm) N/S
HEADER
335 610 1,070,00
0
* Estimate is based on FY98 dollars. Use 3% inflation for future years. The above cost
includes the following:
(Assuming no design costs)
9-11
Materials
Scaffolding up and down
Insulation removal and application
Pipe removal
Pipe fabrication
Hang pipe
Weld out pipe
Hydrostatic tests
Demobilize
Fire watch
The unit rate (dollars/foot) for pipe replacement is calculated to be as shown in Table
9-3.
Table 9-3
Unit Rate for Pipe Replacement
PIPE SIZE 12"
(30.5 cm)
10"
(25.4 cm)
8"
(20.3 cm)
6"
(15.2 cm)
4"
(10.2 cm)
3"
(7.6 cm)
DOLLARS/FT
(DOLLARS/M)
1190
(3903.2)
1100
(3608)
990
(3247.2)
870
(2853.6)
760
(2492.8)
675
(2214)
9-12
Attachment 2
High-Pressure Fire Protection (HPFP) Pipe Replacement/Conversion to Potable
Water System Evaluation and Cost Benefit Analysis

The HPFP system aboveground wet piping is in a degraded condition. The carbon steel
piping suffers from various forms of corrosion and biofouling including pitting and
MIC. To maintain the system in an operable condition, it is expected that the pipe will
require replacement over the next five years. One method to limit future erosion-
corrosion and subsequent pipe replacement is a change to a potable water supply
system. The following comparison looks at the pros and cons of pipe replacement
(Option 1) versus changing the system to a potable water system in addition to pipe
replacement (Option 2). A cost comparison is made for the two options. Additionally,
the cost of replacing the fire protection piping on an as-needed basis is also provided.
Note that the cost of the do nothing option includes items that cannot be quantified.
Table 9-4
Options for Pipe Replacement
Description Option 1 Option 2
Longevity Projected life span of piping ~ 20
years
Projected life span of piping > 30
years
Complexity of
Changes
Simple, like for like pipe
replacements, no design changes.
Requires complex design changes
including:
separation of RSW loads.
Providing alternate water
supplies for RSW users.
New pump house, fire pumps,
tie-ins, etc.

Operation/
Maintenance
Need periodic flushing.
Reduced flow performance over
the years due to E-C, MIC,
sediment buildup, etc.
Requires biocide treatment.
Fire pump maintenance.

Reduced flushing requirements.
Reduced corrosion effects
resulting in consistent flow
performance.
No biocide treatment.
Enhanced fire pump operating
logic.
Cost No initial capital expenditure.
Pipe replacement cost spread
over several years.
Large initial capital expenditure.
Pipe replacement still required
due to degraded pipe condition.
9-13
Table 9-5
Cost Benefit Analysis: 20-Year Remaining Plant Life (1998 Dollars)
Description Option 1 Pipe
Replacement
Only (Dollars)
Remarks Option 2 Pipe
Replacement &
Potable Water
(Dollars)
Remarks
Potable water
System
$0 No initial cost $5,000,000 Initial
installation
cost
Pipe Replacement $230,000 1st Year
Expenses
$230,000 1st Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $940,000 2nd Year
Expenses
$940,000 2nd Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $420,000 3rd year
Expenses
$420,000 3rd Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $872,000 4th Year
Expenses
$872,000 4th Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $1,070,000 5th Year
Expenses
$1,070,000 5th Year
Expenses
Flushing $20,000 per
year for 20
years
Additional
flushes
required to
clean piping.
$0 No flushing
Biocide Treatment $25,000 per
year for 20
years.
Cost of
chemical
treatment.
$0 No chemical
treatment
Major Maintenance $150,000
Replace two
fire pumps, one
after 5 years
and another
after 10 years.
Assume pump
failures require
replacement.
$0 No pump
failure
assumed.
Potable Water $0 No potable
water use.
$15,000 per year Cost of water
for makeup,
flow and
capability tests.
Present Worth
9-14
Table 9-6
Cost Benefit Analysis: 30-Year Remaining Plant Life (1998 Dollars)
Description Option 1 Pipe
Replacement
Only (Dollars)
Remarks Option 2 Pipe
Replacement &
Potable Water
(Dollars)
Remarks
Potable water
System
$0 No initial cost $5,000,000 Initial
installation
cost
Pipe Replacement $230,000 1st Year
Expenses
$230,000 1st Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $940,000 2nd Year
Expenses
$940,000 2nd Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $420,000 3rd Year
Expenses
$420,000 3rd Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $872,000 4th Year
Expenses
$872,000 4th Year
Expenses
Pipe Replacement $1,070,000 5th Year
Expenses
$1,070,000 5th Year
Expenses
Flushing $20,000 per
year for 20
years
Additional
flushes
required to
clean piping.
$0 No flushing
Biocide Treatment $25,000 per
year for 20
years.
Cost of
chemical
treatment of
$0 No chemical
treatment
Major Maintenance $150,000
Replace two
fire pumps, one
after 5 years
and another
after 10 years.
Assume pump
failures require
replacement.
$0 No pump
failure
assumed.
Pipe Replacement $1,700,000 Assume 50 %
of piping
needs to be
replaced after
20 years.
$0 No pipe
replacement
expected
Present Worth
9-15
Table 9-7
Replace Piping On An As-Needed Basis
Description Estimated Cost Remarks
Pipe Failures and Replacements $2,000,000 in the next 5 years.
$5,000,000 over the following
10 years.
Assuming that 1/3rd of the pipe
will require replacement any
way, and the installation costs
will be 50% more.
Remainder of the pipe will
require replacement over the
following 10 years. The cost will
be 100% more.
Contamination/Radwaste $5,000 per year
Compensatory Measures/ Fire
Watches
$25,000 per year
Increased Vulnerability No cost basis
Report to Insurance Company/
Inspection Findings
No cost basis
Decreased Reliability and
Capability
No cost basis
Regulatory Concerns/Violations No cost basis
9-16
Switchyard
Diesel Fire Pump
Remove
(may be kept for emergencies)
Electric Fire Pumps
Remove
Turbine Building
Reactor Building
Overhead Raw
Water Tanks
(Remove)
From City Water Supply
New Water
Tank
New Pump House
Fire Main
(Inside Loop)
New Fire
Pumps Connection
to Outside Fire Main
Significant RSW Loads Served
by the HPFP System:
CCW Bearing Lubrication
Cooling Tower Lift Pumps
Off-Gas Glycol Cooling
Charcoal Adsorber Refrig.
Alternate water supply sources
have to be provided for the
above users.
Figure 9-2
Proposed Potable Water HPFP System
2.1 Corrosion Issues as Related to the Philosophy Of Fire Service
System Use
Executive Summary
The amount and extent of corrosion experienced in a fire service system is a direct
function of the way the system is used. Use of the system involves normal use,
infrequent use, and subsequent treatment.
TMI uses parts of its fire service system as a domestic water supply. This type of system
use results in intermittent flow on a daily basis. The cyclic flow provides a fresh supply
of oxygen, nutrients, and bacterial innoculum coupled with the opportunity to exhibit
biological adherence to pipe walls. Consequently, the fire service system at TMI has
some areas of very advanced MIC in progress. In direct contrast, where the fire service
9-17
system has not seen this cyclic usage, the piping is in like new condition after greater
than 25 years of service.
Operating Conditions and Philosophy
The fire system at TMI is fed from the Susquehanna River with a backup from the
circulating water system. The circulating water system is fed from the river but is
allowed to concentrate from reuse and evaporation. This water source is last in the
priority of use. An electric-driven, automatically starting fire pump is the first pump to
start and is used manually from the control room on a routine basis when use is
expected to exceed the volume of the 25 gpm (94.6 liters per minute) jockey pump. If
demand exceeds the capacity of the electric-driven fire pump, there is an automatically
starting, diesel-driven fire pump that also draws from the river. Finally, an
automatically starting, diesel-driven fire pump drawing from the circulating water
flume will come on line when demand exceeds both of the river pumps.
The electric-driven fire pump (FS-P-2) is used routinely for providing water for any
number of plant-related needs. When the need is satisfied, the pump is secured. This
form of cyclic usage sets up an environment that is conducive to microbiological
growth. Continuous treatment during use would aid in minimizing this effect, but TMI
treats its river water intake only at daily intervals. Because FS-P-2 is typically run any
time during the night or day, it is unlikely that the fire service system receives much of
a treatment. This routine use without benefit of chemical layup when complete is the
heart of the cyclic use philosophy. Normal system flushes for establishing system
operability are similar in effect on the fire service system if lay-up chemicals are not
applied when complete. Chemically protected cyclic use is not a threat to the system
life span, but cyclic use without chemical neutralization of bacterial growth can result
in significant consequences.
Consequences
Figure 9-3 is a photograph of the discharge piping immediately downstream of FS-P-2.
The center of the figure is the gate of the pump discharge isolation valve. This valve is a
12-inch (30.5-cm) gate valve and gives perspective to the size of the nodules. These
nodules are approximately 35 inches (7.612.7 cm) across and about 3 inches (7.6 cm)
thick. There have been three through-wall leaks develop in the piping immediately
downstream of the isolation valve. The downstream piping has leaked prior to the
piping in Figure 9-3 because of the differences in wall thickness. The fitting in
Figure 9-3 is a tee and is consequently made of thicker material for the same piping
schedule.
9-18
Figure 9-3
Discharge Piping Downstream of Valve FS-P-2
Figures 9-4 and 9-5 are photographs of an elbow and associated piping that was
removed (and split) from the fire service system on a dead leg that did not possess the
capability to pass water or be flushed. The fitting was removed to accommodate a plant
modification. Note the near pristine condition of the fitting and piping. The line was
installed at the time of construction and has been in an aqueous environment since
then. This leg of the fire service system was never subjected to the cyclic flow that is so
invigorating to microbial growth. The condition of this untreated idle dead leg
demonstrates the dependence of microorganisms on a continual supply of oxygen and
nutrients.
9-19
Figure 9-4
Elbow Removed from Dead Leg
Figure 9-5
Piping Removed from Dead Leg
Assessment
Assessing the condition of your fire service system as discussed in Section 4 of this
document is based upon inspection, sampling, and operating conditions of the system.
Knowing the operating conditions of the system and the bacterial activity of the
makeup water will enable an effective estimate of the state of the fire service system
before samples are taken. The samples and visual inspections will then function to back
up the initial estimate of the system condition.
9-20
Conclusion
In conclusion, the operating philosophy of the fire system can dictate the number of
problems encountered and the cost of treatment expected. If a fire system is used only
to combat fires and is treated to limit biological growth and corrosion when makeup is
necessary, that system will perform without complication for the life of the plant. On
the other hand, if the system is subjected to cyclic use, expect through-wall failures and
general occlusion with significant flow blockage in small diameter piping. You choose
the operating philosophy of your plants fire system and the consequences associated
with it.
3.1 MIC Tracking Software
Microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) occurring in a fire service system may be
conveniently tracked using advanced computer-aided design (CAD) software. As
samples are performed or as observations are accomplished these results may be placed
on the system drawings to demonstrate the progression or extent of MIC in that system.
For example, if it is found that MIC is progressing through a system over time, these
time- and date-stamped entries on the print will demonstrate this trend.
Advanced CAD programs (AutoCAD is used at TMI) will enable the user to create a
layer on an existing print. The layer does not change the original print but appears as
though it is part of it. If a new revision is issued, the layer information can be
transferred to the new drawing. A layer provides multiple overlays on a single
drawing that can be individually turned on or off at will. Obtaining the most current
revision of the system drawing in the CAD format is necessary to begin. The optimum
use of this technique is to have isometric drawings, but P&IDs can also be used. If
P&IDs are used, some information about the lengths and elevations of runs should be
added to the print. As MIC-related information becomes available, it should be loaded
into the correct location on the drawing as a layer. These layers should be specific to a
type of information. That is, one layer should be used for sample information, one for
system observations, one for leaks, one for leaking pathways, one for system elevations
and lengths, etc. A composite drawing of all or some layers can be viewed or printed at
any time.
In particular, in a fire service system, a leaking dead end hydrant can bring in fresh,
oxygenated, nutrient-carrying water that will accelerate aerobic microbiological
growth. The source to leak pathway can be easily redrawn in a layer in red or some
other distinguishing color to designate the increased potential for MIC. This path
would then receive some additional measure of observation or sampling. These
samples would be logged onto the highlighted overlay.
9-21
In general, CAD programs offer a very convenient method to visualize the extent or the
spread of MIC. Using this tool enables rapid and convenient monitoring of fire service
systems.
4.1 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Fire Protection System
Corrosion and Fouling Treatment
4.2 Executive Summary
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) is the largest free-world electrical
generating station. By being the largest, this requires large systems (sizewise) and
continuous monitoring of system performance. As an example, PVNGS has a fire
protection system large enough for a small town. This system is required to ensure the
safety of the PVNGS staff, the public, and plant equipment.
The fire water system at PVNGS maintains a reliable source of water to fight and
extinguish fires within the three-unit power block areas. The fire water system provides
water flow and pressure to supply the requirements at hose stations and fire hydrants,
and when wet pipe and/or preaction sprinkler systems are activated.
Like any other fire protection systems in a small town, problems exist that need
attention. There have been several problems with the FP system at PVNGS. For
example, problems ranging from internal preaction pipe corrosion and failures to
external main pipe corrosion and failures have occurred. PVNGS has implemented
several FP system investigations and developed several studies to narrow down the
root cause of the problems experienced.
The major task performed and implemented was to divorce the domestic water system
from the fire protection water system. This opened the doors for further treatment and
analysis of the FP system water storage tank. This treatment and analysis consisted of
the installation of a new water treatment subsystem. This system will inject NaOH into
the FP system tanks to increase the pH to 10.5. In addition, a sulfite solution will be
added as an oxygen scavenging agent, and a non-oxidizing biocide will be added to
protect against MIC. The installation of corrosion coupons provided the necessary
means to verify the corrosion rates of the FP piping. Enhanced flushing of the system
provided the means to introduce newly treated water to the power block, as well as a
means of removing the foreign material from the system.
Since the implementation of the new water treatment subsystem and separation of the
domestic water system from the FP system, PVNGS has experienced a reduction in the
number of pipe and valve failures. The implementation of an effective performance-
monitoring program was commissioned to maintain the FP system in a condition of
readiness. Performance monitoring of the FP system consisting of chemical analysis,
9-22
corrosion coupon analysis, hydraulic analysis, system flushing, visual inspections, and
adequate cathodic protection of the FP system piping. Thus far, the performance
monitoring and mitigation techniques have been effective for PVNGS.
This report was prepared to support the EPRI guidelines for the evaluation and
treatment of corrosion and fouling in fire protection systems as a case study. It is a
summary of over 10 years of FP system experience at PVNGS. It is not intended that
this report be a detailed accurate assessment of all the specific problems on the FP
system experienced at PVNGS over the past 20 years.
4.3 Introduction of PVNGS Fire Protection Water System
The fire water system at PVNGS is a subsystem of the fire protection (FP) system.
Portions of the FP system were installed as early as 1975. The installation of the FP
system was completed prior to commercial operation of Unit 1. The fire water system
provides a reliable source of water to fire hydrants for hose usage and wet and
preaction sprinkler systems for monitored area protection. Treated well water is stored
in two large tanks and dedicated to the fire water system. Full system water pressure
and flow can be provided by two of three fire pumps. One fire pump is electric driven,
and the other two pumps are each diesel engine driven.
The fire water system maintains a reliable source of water to fight and extinguish fires
within the power blocks. The fire water system provides water flow and pressure to
supply the requirements at hose stations and fire hydrants for manual fighting. The fire
water system provides water flow and pressure as required when wet pipe and/or
preaction sprinkler systems are activated.
The primary source of water for the system is two 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter)
carbon steel tanks located near the water reclamation plant boundary. Makeup water
for the storage tanks is supplied by either of two domestic water system site wells.
Fire water is supplied to the distribution system by three 50% capacity horizontal,
centrifugal fire pumps. Two of the pumps are driven by diesel engines, and the third is
driven by an electric motor. The pumps take suction from either or both 500,000-gallon
(1,892,706-liter) storage tanks and distribute water through two redundant discharge
lines. A motor- driven jockey pump can maintain fire header pressure at 125 psig (862
kPa) when there is no flow requirement, thus minimizing the necessity for fire pump
starts.
The fire protection water supply yard main is arranged so that each branch line from
the yard main to the various areas in each units facilities can be supplied with water by
alternate flowpaths. Two-way supplied fire hydrants, controlled by individual curb
9-23
box valves, are installed at approximately 250-foot (76.2-m) intervals along each units
yard main. Hydrants are equipped with 2-1/2 inch (6.4 cm) hose connections.
The wet pipe sprinkler system at PVNGS is a fixed fire protection system using piping
filled with pressurized water and activated by fusible sprinklers.
The deluge system at PVNGS employs open directional spray nozzles to provide fire
protection to various areas. This type of system is desirable when water is to be
delivered simultaneously through all sprinklers to wet down an entire area. The water
supply is held back by a deluge valve that is actuated by the operation of a heat-
responsive detection system installed throughout the protected area or by a manual
hydraulic release.
The preaction sprinkler system at PVNGS is used where an alarm in advance of
sprinkler operation is desired and where it is particularly important to prevent the
accidental discharge of water. The system uses closed sprinklers arranged throughout
the hazard area. The control unit monitors a normally open thermostat circuit and line
type temperature detector. Upon closure of the circuit, the control unit sends power to a
solenoid valve that operates the deluge valve admitting water to the piping.
Water is discharged through the sprinklers after their fusible elements operate.
Supervisory dry air pressure is constantly maintained in the sprinkler piping to
ensure the integrity of the piping supply. A trouble alarm sounds if the supervisory
pressure is not properly maintained. Loss of air pressure does not cause the deluge
valve to open.
The fire water storage tanks provide the fire protection water system with its primary
source of fire water. The tanks are constructed of carbon steel and have a diameter of 47
feet (14.3 m) and a height of 40 feet (12.2 m). The tanks are lined with Belzona. The
usable volume of each tank is 500,000 gallons (1,892,706 liters). The tanks are protected
with magnesium anodes. The two water storage tanks are positioned to prevent one
tanks rupture from affecting the system or washing out the other tank. Piping and
valves are arranged such that loss of either tank or a rupture in the suction line results
in the loss of only one diesel-driven fire pump.
During normal operation, the site deep well pumps maintain tank levels greater than
434,000 gallons (1,642,868 liters) (33.5 feet [10.2 m] tank height). If the level continues to
decrease below 388,000 gallons (1,468,739 liters) (30 feet [9.2 m] tank height), a motor-
operated fill valve automatically opens to supply water to the storage tanks. Each
pump is rated at 1440 gpm (5451 liters per minute). One pump is capable of completely
filling one tank in less than 8 hours.
The fire protection water main consists of a closed, 12-inch (30.5 cm), cement-lined,
ductile iron, underground pipe loop encompassing all three PVNGS units, the service
9-24
and administration buildings, and site construction buildings. The cement-lined pipe
helps to reduce the internal tuberculation deposits.
The yard main is provided with post-indicator valves for sectional control. Post-
indicator valves are also located so that the yard loop for any given unit can be isolated.
Manually operated water supply gate valves, installed in the sprinkler and deluge
systems, are used to isolate operable sections from inoperable sections of the system.
In the event that all plant fire pumps are inoperable or cannot furnish adequate supply,
the yard main includes pump connections for obtaining water from the circulating
water system cooling tower basins by using portable pumping units.
A chemical addition skid is utilized to batch add chemicals into the fire water storage
tanks for corrosion control of the fire protection equipment and piping. The chemicals
added are sodium hydroxide and aqueous sulfite solution for pH adjustment (9.510)
and for oxygen scavenging.
4.4 Problems Impacting the PVNGS Fire Protection Water System
The original design of the PVNGS fire protection water system storage tanks was to
supply water to the FP system and to supply water to the reverse-osmosis system for
drinking water, domestic water (DW) system. The water distribution was 300,000
gallons (1,135,624 liters) for the FP system and 200,000 gallons (757,082 liters) for the DS
system. The water in these tanks came from a well water supply system. By having the
two systems use water from these tanks, this caused treatment of the water storage
tanks to be difficult. The problem and difficulty facing PVNGS was as follows:
How can the water storage tanks be treated for protecting the FP piping system
against corrosion and not cause a health problem or hazards to site personnel for the
drinking water side?
Early in 1989, PVNGS performed an extensive investigation into the concerns regarding
internal corrosion in the FP system due to the corrosive nature of the well water. Table
9-8 below shows a typical well water analysis of the FP system water.
9-25
Table 9-8
PVNGS Well Water Analysis - Fire Protection System
Constituent Range of Values
pH 8.1 to 8.5
P alkalinity: ppm as CaCO
3
0 to 12
M alkalinity: ppm as CaCO
3
127 to 218
Chloride: ppm as Cl 144 to 244
Calcium hardness: ppm as CaCO
3
22.7 to 33.7
Total hardness: ppm as CaCO
3
40.7 to 66.2
Sulfate: ppm as SO
4
88.7 to 117
Phosphate: ppm as PO
4
0.4 to 0.5
Silica: ppm as SiO
2
34.3 to 42.7
Total iron: ppm as Fe <0.1 to 3.1
Total dissolved solids: ppm 1001 to 1309
Total SUSPENDED solids: ppm 3 to 6
Conductivity: S/cm 1300 to 1700
Nitrate: ppm as NO
3
13.2 to 16.3
Puckorius scaling index: PSI 7.74 to 8.45
The problems identified include:
1. Carbon steel valve scale buildup
2. Underground cement lined carbon steel pipe corroded and pitted (with possible
tuberculation) in areas where the lining has failed
3. Fire protection pump casing corrosion
4. Minor corrosion under some blisters in the aboveground plasite lined carbon steel
pipe
5. Spalled coating on the water storage tanks, with minor corrosion
In mid-1989, several deposit samples at various locations within the plant fire water
system were taken and analyzed. One sample was positive for the presence of
Gallionella. A 21-day incubation period was applied to several samples. These samples
showed evidence of sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) in several areas. In addition, there
was evidence of bacillus and Diplobacillus bacteria in various areas of the plant. There
was not extractable organic matter detected at this time. Corrosion rates were shown to
be two to three times the typical corrosion rates of 35 mils per year (mpy) [0.080.1
mm/y] for carbon steel in water environments. Although bacterial contamination was
present, there were a small number of piping system failures as a result of MIC attack.
9-26
In 1990, deposit sampling continued in an effort to gather more information from other
areas on site that had not been previously tested. The samples continued to show
evidence of SRB attack, bacillus, Diplobacillus bacteria, and the presence of Gallionella
in several sample locations. Evidence of protozoans and encapsulated bacteria started
to show up in the analysis results. Throughout 1990, monthly samples were taken and
analyzed. The corrosion rates continued at approximately 58 mpy (0.10.2 mm/y). A
majority of the FP system failures experienced at PVNGS have been limited to specific
areas in the preaction systems. The root cause of these failures has been attributed to
corrosion stemming from oxygen cell attack of the wet/dry interface area.
In an effort to slow down the corrosion process on the PVNGS FP piping system, a
corrosion inhibitor was added to the system after the FP/DW water storage tanks. This
was done in an effort to protect the mild steel and galvanized steel within the system.
Monitoring the corrosion rates of these steels continued and is currently being
performed today. To protect against MIC attack or slow the MIC attack process, a
biocide was added. Flushing of the sprinkler systems was performed to allow the
treated water to reach the pipe requiring protection.
4.5 System Evaluation and Assessment
Fire protection system problems started to be a noticeable problem as early as 1980,
when evidence of corrosion on piping systems and valves were present. At that time,
repairs of failed piping and valves were made with no real thought as to why there was
corrosion buildup or why they failed. No mitigation techniques were applied or
implemented. The two 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) storage tanks contained water
from wells on-site. The water within these tanks was untreated prior to use in the FP
system.
In 1985, corrosion rates on the order of 9 mpy (0.23 mm/y) were documented on the FP
piping systems. In addition, the presence of MIC started to appear in samples of fire
water taken and analyzed as early as 1984. Through-wall pipe failures occurred in the
discharge piping of the fire pumps due to galvanic and general corrosion.
An internal site-wide study was commissioned in July 1989 to evaluate all potential
solutions for the problems being experienced on Palo Verdes fire protection system
piping. A multi-disciplinary task team was formed to study the FP system corrosion
issue in depth and make recommendations to management. The team members met
monthly to go over action plans and results of the previous months activities. The
teams focus was on the following:
How can the water storage tanks be treated or converted for FP system use only,
and still provide an alternate source of drinking water?
9-27
The team analyzed all the data collected to date to get a full picture of the extent of the
corrosion and MIC problem in the FP system. Data prior to 1980 was sparsely collected
and not readily available for review and analysis. Based on this, the team decided that
an extensive FP System Corrosion Sampling and Analysis Plan was necessary. This
would give the team the information they needed to obtain funds from management to
implement needed system changes.
The plan was broken up into two parts; 1) for the water sampling data collection and
analysis and 2) for the overall FP system analysis, with recommendations. Site
personnel took piping samples and analyzed them for corrosion rates and evidence of
corrosion products. An independent lab was contracted to take water samples and
analyze the results. An independent consultant was hired to review the overall FP
system problems and provide an expert opinion as to recommendations for upgrades
and fixes. Local universities were also used to obtain a third-party review and analysis
of the samples taken.
The sampling plan consisted of:
Water samples
Water sample cultures to identify MIC-related microbes
UT to measure pipe wall thickness
Scrapings of corrosion products
Visual observations
Coupon exposure to the water and resulting actual corrosion measurements
Corrometer exposure to the water and resulting corrosion rate indications
Sections of pipe were also removed and analyzed in locations where the system has
been installed for more than 10 years. The water samples were taken from portions of
the system that were installed in early 1980 from Unit 1 and late 1980 from Unit 3. The
use of several different techniques, as described above, to measure corrosion activity
and damage provided useful correlations of the techniques and validation of the
sampling. As data were collected, they were compared to the sampling plan to verify
that the expected results were being achieved. If not, the sampling plan was enhanced
to take more samples from other locations. This constant review of the sampling plan
proved to be useful in the overall assessment of the condition of the FP system with
respect to corrosion.
9-28
The results from the sampling plan indicated similar results as were previously found.
Several samples showed positive for the presence of Gallionella. Other samples showed
evidence of sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) in several areas. There was evidence of
bacillus and Diplobacillus bacteria in various areas of the plant. The UT results did not
show any significant uniform or localized corrosion. The corrosion rate was estimated
to be approximately 8 mpy (0.2 mm/y).
After the data were collected and analyzed, an overall assessment was performed on
the results to develop recommendations for system changes and or enhancements. The
assessment team recommended that the 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water storage
tank currently being used for both the FP system and DW system be separated. Two
new tanks should be purchased solely for the DW system usage. The 500,000-gallon
(1,892,706-liter) water storage tank should be used for the FP system only. This would
allow the water in the 500,000-gallon (1,892,706-liter) water storage tank to be treated
prior to sending the water into the FP system piping.
The team also recommended the installation of a simple treatment system. This system
would inject NaOH into the FP system tanks to increase the pH to 10.5. In addition, a
sulfite solution will be added as an oxygen-scavenging agent, and a non-oxidizing
biocide would be added to protect against MIC. When this new system is added to the
FP system as a subsystem, new procedures can be developed for system and
component flushes.
This recommendation was approved for implementation, and in the winter of 1995, the
two systems were divorced, and the new water treatment system was added.
Additional flushing procedures were implemented along with a water sampling
program and a corrosion coupon analysis process.
4.6 PVNGS Fire Protection Water System Control and Mitigation
After the FP water storage tanks were separated from the DW system and the new
water treatment was added, PVNGS developed and implemented several flushing
procedures for sprinkler piping, main headers, and water main supply piping and
pressure isolating valves (PIVs). In addition, water sampling for quality and corrosion
coupon sampling were implemented to provide an assessment of the FP system
condition for trending and analysis purposes.
The goal of these new procedures and processes was to protect the FP piping system
from further internal corrosion and degradation. In addition, improving the longevity
of the FP system was the final outcome or goal of this overall plan. Since the winter of
1995, the corrosion rates have fallen and the MIC attack has been reduced. There have
been very few sprinkler pipe failures and preaction system failures. Flushing of the
9-29
system has removed large amounts of corrosion products and introduced new treated
water to the system.
Quarterly reports from corrosion coupons have documented mild steel corrosion rates
to be on the order of .3 mils per year or less (0.008 mm/y). The quarterly water analysis
report shows the pH to be less than 10 within the power block. There was little
evidence of SRB and MIC attack from the samples taken. Sampling and analysis is
performed on-site to prevent sample degradation as a result of shipping to an off-site
lab.
Overall, it appears that the FP water system control and mitigation is effective in
reducing the mild steel and galvanized steel corrosion. In addition, the water treatment
system installed to improve the chemistry of the FP water system appears to be
effective in controlling SRB and MIC attack. Although there has been some presence of
SRB within the powerblock, the overall consensus is that the treatment is working, and
the results are better than previous years.
A sample of the water analysis and corrosion coupon analysis for one unit at PVNGS is
shown in Table 9-9.
9-30
Table 9-9
Typical PVNGS Water Sample and Corrosion Coupon Analysis
Constituent Range of Values
pH 9.8
Conductivity 1700
Chloride (Cl) 160 Mg/l
Nitrite (NO
2
) <10 Mg/l
Nitrate (NO
3
) <4 Mg/l
Orthophosphate (PO
4
) <4 Mg/l
Sulfate (SO4) 270 Mg/l
Calcium (Ca) 1.2 Mg/l
Magnesium (Mg) 0.2 Mg/l
Sodium (Na) 380 Mg/l
Potassium (K) <0.5 Mg/l
Iron (Fe) <0.05 Mg/l
Copper (Cu) <0.05 Mg/l
Manganese (Mn) <0.05 Mg/l
Aluminum (Al) <0.1 Mg/l
Zinc (Zn) <0.05 Mg/l
Nickel (Ni) <0.05 Mg/l
Chromium (CrO
4
) <0.05 Mg/l
Corrosion rate (mils/yr) <0.1
Within the last three years, there has been an increase in the number of failures of the
underground, concrete-lined, main FP system pipe. The root cause of these failures has
been attributed to:
Improper installation
The highly acidic soil surrounding the pipe
Inadequate cathodic protection of the piping system at these locations
Provisions to detect where the piping system may be weak cathodically have been
developed and will be implemented in late 1998 and throughout 1999. The goal of these
provisions is to minimize these failures, determine the weak links within the system,
and fix them before a failure occurs.
9-31
4.7 Performance Monitoring and System Enhancements
Since the implementation of the new FP system water treatment subsystem and
separation of the DW system water from the FP system water, PVNGS set a goal to
maintain the FP system in a condition that would extend its life. This goal required the
implementation of a performance-monitoring program. Performance monitoring of the
FP system consists of chemical analysis, corrosion coupon analysis, hydraulic analysis,
system flushing results, visual inspections, and adequate grounding of the FP system
piping to the plant ground system for cathodic protection.
The chemical and corrosion coupon analysis is performed quarterly, and the
parameters monitored are similar to those shown in Table 9-9. The hydraulic analysis
consists of an annual pump performance test and an annual system flow test through
each PVNGS unit. The system flushing is performed annually, and it consists of
flushing the underground piping system and valves, as well as the aboveground risers
and preaction systems. The visual inspections consist of an annual overall walkdown of
the system to verify its condition, its readiness to perform its intended function, and
overall system performance inspections performed weekly. Finally, the grounding of
the FP system to the plant ground grid consists of continuity checks at various locations
on the system to verify that the cathodic protection system can perform its function.
From the results received and the monitoring performed since January 1996, the FP
water treatment subsystem appears to be functioning as designed with few failures
resulting from internal corrosion. In addition, flushing appears to be an effective means
of removing foreign material from the system, and the hydraulic analysis/tests have
shown that we have no system blockage within the power block. The weekly
walkdowns of the system status have been effective in identifying potential problems
and system weaknesses.
The results of the ground potential project cannot be assessed at this time; this is a new
system enhancement. The installation of an air dryer to the service air system, which
supplies air to the preaction system, has been effective in preventing moist air from
entering the system.
Report approval date: September 1, 1998, contributed by Henry W. Riley, Jr., P.E.
10-1
10
APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY
absorption. The physical assimilation of molecules into solids without a chemical
reaction.
acid. A chemical compound that dissociates in a water solution to furnish hydrogen
ions.
acid-producing bacteria (APB). Aerobic or anaerobic bacteria that produce acids as
metabolic by-products. Thiobacillus, Clostridium, and Ferrobacillus species are examples
exhibiting this characteristic.
adsorption. The physical adhesion of molecules to surfaces of solids without a chemical
reaction.
aeration. Injecting air through or into water to sweep away other dissolved gases and
to equilibrate it with oxygen and carbon dioxide.
aerobic. An environment containing available oxygen. When referring to bacteria,
indicates those requiring available oxygen for respiration.
AFSA. American Fire Sprinkler Association.
algae. A simple form of aquatic plant life that uses sunlight for photosynthesis and
growth. Those that contribute to corrosion and fouling concerns are usually colored
green or blue green and form filamentous biofouling masses.
alkalinity (basicity). The quantitative ability of aqueous media to neutralize hydrogen
ions. The term alkalinity as used in water treatment, usually expressed as equivalent
amounts of calcium carbonate, refers to the amount of titratable bicarbonate, carbonate,
or hydroxide ions present, as determined by titration to a pH endpoint of 4.2.
alkalinity, total (M). The ability of water to consume acid until it reaches a pH of 4.2,
the point where methyl red indicator turns from orange to red. It is the sum of the
bicarbonate and the carbonate alkalinities, or the sum of the carbonate and hydroxide
alkalinities. It is expressed as ppm or mg/l calcium carbonate.
Appendix C: Glossary
10-2
ammonia. The chemical compound NH
3
. Ammonia is corrosive to copper and copper
alloys. It is consumed by nitrogen bacteria. In FPS treated with nitrite, ammonia can be
produced as a byproduct of denitrifying bacteria.
anaerobic. An environment containing no available oxygen (compare to aerobic). When
referring to bacteria, indicates those that can live under oxygen-free conditions.
anion. A negatively charged ion. Examples are chloride (Cl
-
) and sulfate (SO
4
-2
) that
migrates through the electrolyte toward the anode under the influence of a potential
gradient.
anionic. Pertaining to an ion, colloid particle, or metallic surface containing a negative
charge.
anode. 1. In the corrosion process, the area where metal is removed; does not influence
the corrosion rate (compare with cathode). The pH at the anode is generally lower than
the pH of the water. 2. The electrode of an electrochemical cell at which oxidation
occurs. Electrons flow away from the anode in the external circuit. Corrosion usually
occurs and metal ions enter the solution at the anode.
anodic inhibitor. A chemical substance that prevents or reduces the rate of the anodic
or oxidation reaction.
antiscalant. A chemical that prevents deposition of scale on system surfaces and in
sprinklers.
assessment. The procedure of determining the current condition of the system by
testing and evaluating available data pertaining to the capability of the system to
perform its design function.
bacteria. Among the simplest single cell forms of microscopic life. When related to FPS,
usually classified in terms of oxygen requirements (for example, aerobic, anaerobic) or
metabolic/nutritional characteristics (for example, sulfate reducing, iron oxidizing,
slime forming, acid producing, etc.)
base. An alkaline substance that raises the pH of water and yields hydroxyl ions. A
base can neutralize acids.
biocide. A chemical used to kill biological organisms such as algae, bacteria, or fungi.
biodispersant. A chemical that disperses biofilm, biomass, or other organic deposits.
biofilm. A film-like deposit of extracellular polymeric substances produced by
microorganisms that adheres the surfaces on which microorganisms grow. (See slime)
10-3
biological fouling. A fouling deposit that forms on system surfaces, screens, filters,
sprinkler nozzles, and other components that interferes with liquid flow. It is typically
composed of biomass and other dirt and debris found in the aqueous medium.
biomass. An accumulation of microorganisms and biofilm that deposits on system
surfaces and contributes to biofouling.
biostat. A chemical that prevents or reduces the capability of microorganisms to
reproduce.
carbon steel. A metal used for piping and equipment, commonly found in cooling
water systems. It is made by combining carbon with iron. It is commonly referred to as
mild steel.
cathode. 1. In the corrosion process, the area of metal that is not removed, but that
controls the rate of corrosion (compare with anode). The pH at the cathode is generally
higher than in the water. 2. The electrode of an electrochemical cell at which reduction
is the principal reaction. Electrons flow toward the cathode in the external circuit.
cathodic corrosion. Corrosion resulting from a cathodic condition of a structure,
usually caused by the reaction of an atmospheric metal with the alkaline products of
electrolysis.
cathodic inhibitor. A chemical substance that prevents or reduces the rate of the
cathodic or reduction reaction.
cation. A positively charged ion that migrates through an electrolyte toward the
cathode under the influence of a potential gradient.
cationic. Pertaining to an ion, colloid particle, or metallic surface containing a positive
charge.
caustic. A common term for sodium hydroxide or other strong alkalies.
chlorination. The treatment of water with chlorine or chlorine-releasing compounds.
chlorine demand. The amount of chlorine that must be added to water before a
residual occurs.
chlorine residual. The sum of free and combined chlorine; often termed total residual
chlorine (TRO).
clarification. The process of removing suspended solids from water by charge
neutralization, coagulation, and settling.
10-4
combined chlorine. Chlorine complexed with other compounds but still an oxidant,
such as chloramines; not as biocidally effective as free chlorine.
concentration cell. An electrochemical cell, the electromotive force of which is caused
by a difference in concentration of some component in the electrolyte. (This difference
leads to the formation of discrete cathodic and anodic regions.)
conductivity (of water). The ability of water to conduct electricity. When measured
with a standard apparatus, it is called specific conductivity and is a function of the total
dissolved solids.
control parameters. Parameters such as pH, conductivity, and corrosion-inhibitor
concentrations that assist in the control of a chemical treatment program. These
parameters might have an immediate effect on corrosion in the CCW system.
control range. For a given parameter, the acceptable operating region between upper
and lower specification limits.
corrosion. The degradation of a metal by a chemical or electrochemical reaction with its
environment.
corrosion control by linear polarization (LP) measurements. Corrosion monitoring by
an instrument that operates on the principle that a voltage impressed across the
interface boundary will result in a current flow that is directly proportional to the
corrosion occurring on the metal electrode surface. Results are instantaneous (real
time).
corrosion coupons. Metal specimens that are carefully prepared, weighed, and inserted
into the water stream, exposed for a period of time, (usually 30 days or more),
removed, and re-weighed to determine a weight loss. The weight loss is used to
calculate a corrosion rate for the specific metal alloy. Results are cumulative over the
time of exposure.
corrosion inhibitor. A chemical substance or combination of substances that, when
present in the environment, reduces corrosion.
corrosion monitoring by electrical resistance (ER) measurements. Real-time
monitoring of corrosion by measuring the resistance of a section of wire that is exposed
to the water. As the wire corrodes, its cross-sectional area decreases, causing an
increase in resistance. The resistance increase over time is converted to a corrosion rate
and, thus, the results are cumulative over the exposure period.
corrosion product solids deposition. Deposits that contain mostly metal oxides, which
are by-products of active corrosion occurring within the system.
10-5
corrosiveness. The tendency of an environment to cause corrosion.
crevice corrosion. The localized corrosion of a metal surface at, or immediately adjacent
to, an area that is shielded from full exposure to the environment containing O
2
because
of close proximity of the metal to the surface of another material. The area shielded
from the environment becomes anodic.
dealloying. The selective corrosion of one or more components of a solid solution-alloy
(also known as parting or selective dissolution).
denitrification. The reduction of nitrate or nitrite to elemental nitrogen and ammonia.
denitrifying bacteria. Facultative anaerobic bacteria that produce nitrogen and
ammonia from nitrite and nitrate. The Pseudomonas species exhibits this behavior
during anaerobic respiration.
deposits. Any materials that form accumulations such as scale or sludge. They may be
mineral, microbiological, or oils.
dezincification. A corrosion phenomenon resulting in the selective removal of zinc
from copper-zinc alloys. (This phenomenon is one of the more common forms of
dealloying).
diagnostic parameters. Parameters that provide baseline chemistry information that
can alert the system chemistry reviewer to potential problems or can assist with
troubleshooting of problems.
dip slides. See microbiological monitoring by dip slides.
dispersant. Chemicals added to water systems to keep insoluble solids suspended or
dispersed. Dispersants are used to prevent accumulation of deposits or sludge.
dissolved oxygen. The gas O
2
dissolved in water. In FPS treatment, dissolved oxygen
allows the growth of aerobic bacteria and is detrimental from a corrosion standpoint.
dissolved solids. Matter, exclusive of gases, that is dissolved in water to give a single
phase of homogeneous liquid. (The amount might be determined by calculation
[addition of individual constituents] or by evaporating to dryness then weighing the
residue. Note: These methods may not agree; certain adjustments are required to offset
losses or gains of CO
2
in drying, and so on). Also see total dissolved solids.
efficacy. When used in the context of water treatment, it usually refers to the potency or
effectiveness of a chemical treatment compound to produce the desired results.
10-6
electrochemical cell. A system consisting of an anode and a cathode immersed in an
electrolyte to create an electrical circuit. The anode and cathode may be different metals
or dissimilar areas on the same metal surface.
electrode. A conductor used to establish contact with an electrolyte and through which
a current is transferred to or from an electrolyte.
electrolyte. 1. Water containing charged ions. 2. A chemical substance containing ions
that migrate in an electric field.
facultative anaerobic bacteria. Bacteria that can become either aerobic or anaerobic
under the proper conditions.
film. A thin, not necessarily visible, layer of material.
filter. A device or structure for removing solid or colloidal matter (which usually
cannot be removed by sedimentation) from water. This uses a straining process where
the solids are held on a medium of some kind (granular, diatomaceous earth, woven,
porous) while the liquid passes through.
flocculation. The neutralization of more than one colloidal particle by the same agent.
The resulting relatively large neutral particle will settle out of suspension by
gravitational attraction.
foulant. Usually any suspended material that deposits on pipe surfaces, in sprinklers,
on screens/filters, or in valves that causes a loss in flow capabilities or plugging.
fouling. 1. The deposition of a foulant on system surfaces. 2. An accumulation of
deposits. This includes accumulation and growth of aquatic organisms on a submerged
metal surface, and the accumulation of deposits (usually inorganic) on FPS
components.
FPSs. Fire protection systems.
free chlorine. The chlorine content of water in the biologically active form of
hypochlorus acid and/or hypochlorite ion; often termed free available chlorine (FAC).
galvanic corrosion. The corrosion occurring when two dissimilar metals are in contact
and one corrodes. An example of galvanic corrosion is when copper and carbon steel
are in direct contact, resulting in rapid mild steel corrosion.
galvanic couple. The non-insulated direct contact point of two dissimilar metals at
which a galvanic corrosion cell is created.
10-7
general (lateral) corrosion. Corrosion that is distributed more or less uniformly over
the surface of a material.
graphitic corrosion. Deterioration of cast iron in which the metallic constituents are
selectively leached or converted to corrosion products, leaving the graphite intact.
Graphitic corrosion is a form of dealloying.
halogen. In water treatment, pertaining to the oxidizing biocides chlorine or bromine.
hardness. A characteristic of water, generally accepted to represent the total
concentration of calcium and magnesium ions.
heat-affected-zone (HAZ). That portion of the base metal that is not melted during
brazing, cutting, or welding, but whose microstructure and properties are altered by
the heat of these processes.
heavy metal. An arbitrary name given to certain metallic ions that can be toxic to
aquatic organisms. They might include chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc.
holiday. A discontinuity in a protective coating that exposes unprotected surface to the
environment.
impressed current cathodic protection (ICP). Corrosion inhibition produced by
supplying an electric current from a power source external to the electrode system.
inhibitor. A material that reduces a normal tendency to cause scale or corrosion.
Usually used to describe chemicals that minimize corrosion through the formation of
protective films on a base metal.
jockey pump. A pump component of an FPS used to maintain a designed head
pressure on the water contained in the system. As pressure drops, the pump delivers
water into the system to maintain the pressure.
localized corrosion. Corrosion that is concentrated in a relatively small area. It is
promoted by a separation between the cathodic and anodic areas. The metal loss forms
a penetration rather than general thinning. It is therefore, much more likely to cause an
unexpected metal failure than is general corrosion.
macrofouling. Fouling caused by the growth and accumulation of macroorganisms
(mollusks) such as mussels, barnacles, snails, and clams.
macroorganisms. A group of organisms that are visually observable; in terms of water
treatment and FPSs, this include mussels, barnacles, snails, clams, hydroids, and
bryzoa.
10-8
makeup. That portion of water added to an FPS to compensate for water losses by
blowdown (bleed-off), or other losses. Makeup can be raw or pretreated water.
MIC. See microbiologically influenced corrosion.
microbiological monitoring by dip slides. A semiquantitative method of testing for
total aerobic bacteria. In this process, a slide containing agar is dipped into the bulk
water and incubated for a specified time. Colonies appearing on the slide are compared
to a chart to determine results.
microbiological monitoring by plate count. A technique used to determine the total
number of bacteria. Pour plate, spread plate, or membrane filtration are variations on
the basic method.
microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC). Degradation of material that is
accelerated due to conditions under a biofilm or microfouling tubercle (for example,
anaerobic bacteria that can set up an electrochemical galvanic reaction or inactivate a
passive protective film, or acid-producing bacteria that might produce corrosive
metabolites).
microfouling. Buildup of a biologically produced slime layer (usually by bacteria) on
wetted or submerged surfaces. Microfouling is primarily of concern in FPS because of
possibly contributing to microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC).
mitigation. The process of dealing with an undesirable situation by preventing it from
becoming worse, by reducing the severity of the situation, or by eliminating the
situation.
monitoring. The use of techniques, tests, and instrumentation to directly or indirectly
provide assurance that the water treatment program is providing the desired results.
NACE. National Association of Corrosion Engineers International.
NFPA. National Fire Protection Association.
NFSA. National Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.
nitrate. The anion NO
3
. In FPSs, the presence of nitrate is a diagnostic parameter used
to detect the breakdown of a nitrite corrosion inhibitor.
nitrification. The oxidation of ammonia and ammonium salts to nitrate.
nitrifying bacteria. Bacteria that oxidize ammonia and ammonium salts to nitrate.
10-9
nitrite. The anion NO
2
. Sodium nitrite NaNO
2
is a mild steel corrosion inhibitor, used
in FPSs. Nitrite is easily degraded to nitrate by oxygen and Nitrobacter bacteria.
Nitrobacter sp. bacteria. A species of bacterium that oxidizes nitrite to nitrate.
nitrosofication. The oxidation of ammonia to nitrite.
Nitrosomonas sp. bacteria. A bacterial species that oxidizes ammonia to nitrite in
neutral or very slightly alkaline medium, using carbon dioxide or carbonates as their
sole source of carbon.
noble metal. 1. A metal that occurs in nature in the free state. 2. A metal or alloy whose
corrosion products are formed with a small negative or positive free energy charge.
nondestructive evaluation (NDE). A monitoring technique that does not damage the
specimen. See ultrasonic testing, eddy current testing, and radiographic testing.
non-ionic. A colloidal particle without a surface charge, or a non-ionized molecule in
solution.
non-oxidizing biocide. A biocide whose effectiveness depends upon some property
other than its ability to oxidize organic material, for example, systemic poison or
surface activity.
oxidizing agent. A chemical that reacts with a target molecule and causes it to lose an
electron (undergo oxidization).
oxidizing biocide. A biocide whose effectiveness depends upon its ability to oxidize
and, thus, destroy organic material, for example, chlorine, bromine, and ozone.
parts per million (ppm). A unit weight of a substance dissolved in one million unit
weights of water, for example, one pound per million pounds. Essentially equivalent to
milligrams per liter.
passivation. To make a metal passive.
passive. 1. A metal active in the Emf series or an alloy composed of such metals is
considered passive when its electrochemical behavior becomes that of an appreciably
less active or noble metal. 2. A metal or alloy is passive if it substantially resists
corrosion in an environment where, thermodynamically, there is a large free energy
decrease associated with its passage from the metallic state to appropriate corrosion
products [8].
10-10
phosphates. Phosphorus-containing chemicals used for corrosion and deposit-control
in cooling systems. Commonly, these occur as orthophosphates, polyphosphates, and
organic phosphates.
pickling. The conditioning of metal surfaces by the production of an oxide film that
adheres to the metal. This is usually done by acid treatment of the metal surface.
pitting. Localized corrosion of a metal surface that is confined to a small area and takes
the form of cavities called pits.
plankton. Microorganisms in FPSs that are found in the bulk water.
polyphosphates. Condensation products of phosphoric acid. Used in water treatment
as corrosion inhibitors and dispersants.
radiographic testing (RT). A nondestructive method that provides images of natural or
engineered structures based upon differences in the absorption characteristics of the
material to incident electromagnetic or particle radiation.
raw water. Untreated water often used as a source of water supply taken from a natural
or impounded body of water, such as a stream, lake, or ground water aquifer.
reducing agent. A chemical that reacts with a target molecule and forces it to gain an
electron (undergo reduction).
sacrificial anode. A third metal specimen that is attached to the less noble metal of a
galvanic couple to prevent its corrosion. The sacrificial anode is the least noble metal of
the three metals; therefore, it corrodes (or is sacrificed) to save the metal being
protected.
sessile. Microorganisms in an FPS that are not in the bulk water but are attached to
surfaces; part of slime masses.
slime. Gelatinous deposits that are usually microbiological growths (microfouling) that
might entrap other insoluble materials from the water to cause fouling and possibly
contributing to MIC.
socket weld. A welded connection where one piece fits inside another, as opposed to a
butt-weld.
sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB). Anaerobic bacteria, such as Desulfovibrio desulfuricans
sp., that reduce sulfates and produce sulfides.
surfactant. A surface-active chemical such as a detergent.
10-11
suspended solids. The solid, non-soluble material dispersed in water. Total filterable
solids.
total dissolved solids (TDS). The sum of the organic and inorganic materials dissolved
in water.
total suspended solids (TSS). The total amount of filterable materials suspended in the
water.
tuberculation. Formation of knob-like mounds or growths called tubercles that are often
the result of corrosion.
turbidity. The reduction of transparency of a liquid due to the scattering of light by
suspended solids.
ultrasonic testing (UT). A nondestructive method for characterizing flaws or wall
thickness in metallic piping and components, usually from the outside surface.
under-deposit corrosion. A form of crevice corrosion that is caused by the separation
of anodic and cathodic areas by a deposit.
veliger. Shell-less, immature, motile life-form in the growth cycle of mollusks such as
zebra mussels and Asian clams.
11-1
11
APPENDIX D: BIBLIOGRAPHY
Reference Books and Manuals
Biologically Induced Corrosion. Proceedings of the International Conference on
Biologically Induced Corrosion. S. C. Dexter, ed. NACE International, Houston, TX (1985).
Closed Cooling Water Chemistry Guideline. TR-107396. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, October 1997.
Corrosion Basics: An Introduction, second edition. NACE International, Houston, TX
(1984).
Corrosion Inhibitors. C. C. Nathan, ed., NACE International, Houston, TX (1973).
Detection and Control of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion. NP 6115-D. Palo Alto, CA:
EPRI, 1990.
Handbook of Biocides and Preservatives. Chapter 3 by R. W. Lutey, H. W. Rossmoore ed.,
Chapman and Hall, New York, NY, 1995.
Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water Based Fire Protection Systems. American Fire
Sprinkler Association, Dallas, TX (1995).
A Practical Manual on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion. Gregory Kobrin, ed. NACE
International, Houston, TX, 1993.
Service Water System Chemical Addition Guideline. TR-106229. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, July
1997.
Sourcebook of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Plants. NP-5580. Palo Alto,
CA: EPRI, 1988.
Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection
Systems, 1995 Edition. NFPA 25-95. National Fire Sprinkler Association, Patterson,
NY, 1994.
Appendix D: Bibliography
11-2
A Study of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Plants and a Practical Guide for
Countermeasures. NP-4582. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, 1990.
A Training Program-Applied Technology on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in the
Power Industry. TM-1001. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, August 1994.
Water Text: The Complete Reference of Chemicals, Processes, and Suppliers. Gary Caplan ed.,
Caplan Technical Resources, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1998.
Information Industry Surveys
Bsharat, Tariq K., Detection, Treatment, and Preservation of Microbiologically Influenced
Corrosion in Water-Based Fire Protection Systems. National Fire Sprinkler Association,
Patterson, NY, June 1998.
Fire Protection Piping. E-SWAP Survey 92-507. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, 0270.2-
1607. EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
Fire Protection System Water Source. E-SWAP Survey 98-(1/27/98). EPRI-SWAP
Technical Library. EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
Microbiological Test Kit. E-Swap Survey 98-011. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, EPRI
NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
MIC - Microbiology
Iverson, W. P., Mechanisms of Anaerobic Corrosion of Steel by Sulfate Reducing
Bacteria, Materials Performance, 21(3):2830, 1984.
Iverson, W. P., Microbial Corrosion of Metals. Advances in Applied Microbiology, 32:1
37, 1987.
Lutey, R. W., Identification and Characterization of MIC Associated with Metal-
Oxidizing Bacteria. Paper No. 292. Presented at NACE Corrosion/93, Houston, TX,
1993.
McMahon, R. F. and R. W. Lutey, Review of the Effects of Invertebrate Macrofouling
on MIC in Raw Water System. Paper No. 96-70. Proceedings of the International Water
Conference 1996. Engineering Society of Western PA. Pittsburgh, PA, 1996.
11-3
MIC - Detection
Detection and Control of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion. NP-6115-D. Palo Alto, CA:
EPRI, 1990.
Lutey, R. W., The Detection and Mitigation of MIC in the Power Generating Industry,
Workshop Presentation, Fifteenth Annual Electric Utility Chemistry Workshop, Univ.
of Illinois, March 1995. Buckman Laboratories , Memphis, TN, No. W271W, April 1995.
Lutey, R. W., Identification and Characterization of MIC Associated with Metal-
Oxidizing Bacteria. Paper No. 292. Presented at NACE Corrosion/93, Houston, TX,
1993.
Lutey, R. W. and D. P. Mason, Identification of Root Cause Failure of Piping in a
Service Water System. Heat Exchanger Technologies for the Global Environment. 1994
Inter. Joint Power Generation Conference, PWR, 25: 6978. ASME, New York, NY 1994.
Pope, D. H., Testing For and Treating MIC. Sprinkler Age, December 1997.
Pope, D. H., Final Report on the Investigation of a Fire Protection System for Evidence of
Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion. BioIndustrial Technologies, Inc., Georgetown, TX,
1994.
Stoudt, M. R., J. L. Fink, and R. E. Ricker, Analysis of Failed Dry Pipe Fire Suppression
System Couplings from the Filene Center at Wolf Trap Farm Park for the Performing Arts.
National Inst. Standards and Technology, Rept. No. NISTIR-5389, NIST (MSEL),
Gaithersburg, MD, March 1994.
Wendell, J. A., Investigation of the Fire Water Corrosion/Deposit Problem at Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant. EPRI- SWAP Technical Library, 0126.5-781. EPRI NDE Center,
Charlotte, NC.
MIC - Control and Mitigation
Bshart, Tariq K., Detection, Treatment, and Preservation of Microbiologically Influenced
Corrosion in Water-Based Fire Protection Systems. National Fire Sprinkler Association,
Patterson, NY, June 1998.
Corrosion and Sludge Prevention in Automatic Sprinkler Fire Protection Systems.
U.S. Patent No. 5,803,180, assigned to Roger K. Talley, Sept. 8, 1998.
11-4
Fellers, B. D., Control and Mitigation of Fire Protection System Degradations Due to Fouling
and Corrosion. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, 0126.5-732. EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte,
NC.
Hollis, C. G. and R. W. Lutey, Method for the Control of Deposits Using N,N, -
dimethylamides of 18 Carbon Unsaturated Carboxylic Acids. U.S. Patent 3,558,500,
1971.
Lutey, R. W., The Detection and Mitigation of MIC in the Power Generating Industry.
Workshop Presentation, Fifteenth Annual Electric Utility Chemistry Workshop, Univ.
of Illinois, March 1995. Buckman Laboratories , Memphis, TN No. W271W, April 1995.
Lutey, R. W. Enzyme Technology: A Tool for the Prevention and Mitigation of MIC.
Paper No. 97-71. Proceedings of the 1997 International Water Conference. Engineering
Society of Western PA, Pittsburgh, PA, 1997.
Lutey, R. W. and P. J. Allison, Strategies for the Mitigation of MIC in Industrial Water
Systems. Proceedings of the 1991 International Water Conference, Engineering Society of
Western PA, Pittsburgh, PA, 1991.
Lutey, R. W. and P. J. Allison., Strategies for the Mitigation of MIC in Industrial Water
Systems. Proceedings of the 1991 International Water Conference. Engineering Society of
Western PA. Pittsburgh, PA, 1991.
Lutey, R. W., V. M. King, and M. Z. Cleghorn, Mechanisms of Action of
Dimethylamides as a Penetrant/Dispersant in Cooling Water Systems. 1989
Proceedings of the International Water Conference. Engineering Society of Western PA,
Pittsburgh, PA, 1989.
McReynolds, Gary S., Prevention of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Fire
Protection Systems at a Semiconductor Manufacturing Facility. Paper no. 286.
Presented at NACE Corrosion/98, San Diego, CA, March 1998.
Melton, M. A., Nuclear Engineering Study of Fire Protection (FP) System Corrosion and
Recommendations for Mitigation. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, 0076.5-652, EPRI NDE
Center, Charlotte, NC.
Moisidis, N. T., Corrosion Control Program Reduces FPS Failure Risk. EPRI-SWAP
Technical Library, 0076.5-2043, EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
Moisidis, N. T. and M. D. Ratiu, Corrosion Control Program Reduces FPS Failure
Risk. Power Engineering. 100:4 pp 3942, April 1996.
Pope, D. H., Testing for and Treating MIC. Sprinkler Age, December 1997.
11-5
Rittenhouse, R. C., Program Reduces Fire Protection System Corrosion. Power
Engineering, pp 2123, Oct. 1995.
Shenkiryk, M. Chemical Cleaning Process for Water Systems. Water/Engineering
Management, vol. 3, March 1996.
A Study of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Plants and a Practical Guide for
Countermeasures. NP-4582. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, 1990.
A Training Program-Applied Technology on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in the
Power Industry. TM-1001. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, August 1994.
Vickers, D. L. and R. L. McGowan. Water Tanks: Elements of an Effective Coating
System. Materials Performance, vol 9, September 1988.
MIC - Case Histories
Biologically Induced Corrosion, Proceedings of the International Conference on
Biologically Induced Corrosion. S. C. Dexter, ed. NACE International, Houston, TX, 1985.
Implementation of Fire Protection Requirements (Generic Letter 86-10). United States
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C., April 24, 1986.
Lutey, R. W. and D. P. Mason, Identification of Root Cause Failure of Piping in a
Service Water System. Heat Exchanger Technologies for the Global Environment. 1994
Inter. Joint Power Generation Conf. PWR 25: pp 6978. ASME, New York, NY, 1994.
McReynolds, Prevention of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Fire Protection
Systems at a Semiconductor Manufacturing Facility. Paper no. 286. Presented at NACE
Corrosion/98, San Diego, CA, March 1998.
A Practical Manual on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion, Gregory Kobrin, ed.
NACE International, Houston, TX 1993.
Rittenhouse, R. C., Program Reduces Fire Protection System Corrosion. Power
Engineering, pp 2123, Oct. 1995.
Sourcebook of Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion in Nuclear Plants. NP-5580. Palo Alto,
CA: EPRI, 1988.
Stoudt, M. R., J. L. Fink, and R. E. Ricker, Analysis of Failed Dry Pipe Fire Suppression
System Couplings from the Filene Center at Wolf Trap Farm Park for the Performing Arts.
11-6
Rept. No. NISTIR - 5389. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg,
MD, March 1994.
Wendell, J. A., Investigation of the Fire Water Corrosion/Deposit Problem at Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant. EPRI- SWAP Technical Library, 0126.5-781. EPRI NDE Center,
Charlotte, NC.
Macrofouling
Gauthier, C., Impact of Zebra Mussel Infestation on Fire Protection and Safety Systems of
Utility Generating Stations. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library. EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte,
NC.
Gauthier, C., Impact of Zebra Mussel Infestation on the Fire Protection System Nantucket
Thermal Generating Station. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte,
NC.
Lewis, D. P. et al., A Method for Assessing the Risk of Zebra Mussel Dreissena
polymorpha Infestations in Industrial Fire Protection Systems. Fire Technology, 33(3),
1997.
McMahon, R. F. and R. W. Lutey, Review of the Effects of Invertebrate Macrofouling
on MIC in Raw Water System. Paper No. 96-70. Proceedings of the International Water
Conference 1996, Engineering Society of Western PA, Pittsburgh, PA, 1996.
Service Water System Chemical Addition Guideline. TR-106229. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, July
1997.
FPS - Design and Materials
An Investigation of the Water Quality and Condition of Pipe in Existing Automatic
Sprinkler Systems for the Analysis of Design Options with Residential Sprinkler
Systems. National Bureau of Standards, NBS-GCR-82-399. NBS Center for Fire
Research, Gaithersburg, MD, August 1962.
Notarinni, K. A. and M. A. Jackson, Comparison of Fire Sprinkler Piping Materials:
Steel, Copper, Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride and Polybutylene in Residential and
Light Hazard Installations. Rpt. No. NISTIR 5339, National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, June 1994. EPRI-SWAP Technical Library, 0126.5-2039.
EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
11-7
Shumway, Paul W., Life Expectancy of Sprinkler System Piping. Heating, Piping, and
Air Conditioning, 67:10, October 1995.
Waller, G., Stainless Steel for Durability, Fire-Resistance and Safety. EPRI-SWAP
Technical Library, 0255.0-1543. EPRI NDE Center, Charlotte, NC.
FPS - Inspection, Testing, Maintenance
Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water Based Fire Protection Systems, American Fire
Sprinkler Association, Dallas, TX, 1995.
Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection
Systems, 1995 Edition. NFPA 25-95, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA,
1994.

Guideline For The Evaluation and Treatment of Corrosion and Fouling in Fire Protection Systems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guideline For The Evaluation and Treatment of Corrosion and Fouling in Fire Protection Systems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

You might also like