39147

Two Pa rk Av en u e tel 1.212.591.
8500
Ne w Yo rk, NY fax 1.212.591.8501
1 0 0 1 6 -5 9 9 0 U.S.A. www.asme.org
AGENDA
BPV III Special Committee on Interpretations Session
May 15, 2013
Tracking PTM Subject Page

ASME BPV III, Division 1, Subsection NF
*INTENT*
12-732 Stinson, Jon 5
Status: Mr. Stinson is asked to address the comments from
ballot 13-462.
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1: Material

Certification
*INTENT*
12-896 Martin, Michael Status: This item was approved by the BPV III Standards 21
Committee via recirculation ballot 13-462RC1. All comments
have been responded to and this item will be sent to BNCS for
approval.
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, Appendix I, Fig. I-9.1
12-1021 Deubler, Pete Status: The secretary advised the inquirer noting a code 27
revision has been opened to include the appropriate fatigue
curve.
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NF 3322.8(c)(4)(a)
Status: It was advised that additional information should be

12-1042 Yan, Jinquan 30
requested. Specific details need to be requested from the
CIWG.
ASME BPVC Section III, NE-6225 (2001 Code Edition through

2002 Addenda) Examination of Inaccessible Welds
12-1307 Jesse, Bob 33
Status: The inquirer submitted a revised request for
interpretation following the November 2012 meeting.
Page 1 of 112
Agenda BPV III Special Interpretations Session
May 15, 2013
ASME BPVC Section III, NCA-3251

12-1331 LaRochelle, Wil 36
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, NB-1132
*INTENT*
12-1349 Hill, Ralph 38
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-3228.4 (c)
*INTENT* - Linked to 13-283
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-3226

*INTENT*
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-2223.3

12-1919 Jessee, Robert 51
Status: The inquirer submitted a revised request for
interpretation.
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-8322
12-1930 Pleins, Ed Status: This item was approved via ballot 12-2602 and 53
subsequently by the BNCS via ballot 13-592. This item is now
approved.
ASME Section III Div.1, 2011 Addenda and earlier

Editions/Addenda, NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5521(a)(4)
*INTENT* - Linked to 12-454
12-1972 Jessee, Robert 58
Status: This item was sent for ballot 13-462. The project
manager is asked to address the ballot comments.
ASME BPVC Section III, Div.2, Table CC-4552-2, EXEMPTIONS

TO MANDATORY PWHT, the first paragraph on Type of Weld
reads All welds, including repair welds, in material 1-1/2 in.
12-2088 Eberhardt, Curt 66
(38 mm) and less (2004 edition)
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-6114.3

12-2288 Jessee, Bob 68
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1(b) Furnishing of

Approved Suppliers Certification of Heat Analysis (2010 Edition
13-291 Vickery, Douglas and 2011a Addenda) 71
*INTENT*
Page 2 of 112
May 15, 2013
Status: This item was sent for ballot 13-462. The project
manager is asked to address the ballot comments.
ASME BPVC Section III NCA-3252(c)

13-440 Jing, Yi 78
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III NB-5410(b) and NCA-3252(c)

13-442 Jing, Yi 80
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III Table NB-3681(a)-1

13-443 Liang, Bingbing 82
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III NC-3650

13-444 Wang, Yong 84
Status:
ASME Section Ill, Division I, NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG/NH-2121

Permitted material specifications (Edition 20I0, Addenda 20II)
13-698 Jesses, Bob 86
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1,Subsections
NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG - 2431.1(b); Section III, Division 2
Subsection CC-2612.1.1(b) and Section III, Division 3,
Subsections WB/WC-2431.1(b). 2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda.
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-4250(c)
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III NB-6114.2, Edition 1998, Addenda 2000
and NCA-8322 Edition 2010, Addenda 2011
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III, NCA-3861, 2010 Edition 2011 Addenda
Status:
ASME BPVC Section III Division 1, NE-2431.1; General Test
Requirements (for Weld Metal Tests).
Status:
Page 3 of 112
May 15, 2013
Section III Division 1, NA/NCA 1971 Edition to 2007 Edition,

through 2009 Addenda
III-1-10-20
(Record 10- Jessee, Bob 106
856)
Status: At the February 2013 meeting this item was brought
forward for withdrawal. Mr. Jessee is asked to follow up with
Mr. Ed Renaud.
Code Case N-759, Alternative Rules for Determining Allowable
13-845 Hill, Ralph External Pressure and Compressive Stresses for Cylinders, 107
Cones, Spheres, and Formed Heads Section Ill, Division 1
13-864 LaRochelle, Wil BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3530 and NCA-3620(q) 110
Page 4 of 112
C&S Connect - View 12-732 Interpretations Record Form Page 1 of 5
C&S Connect
New! Updates to C&S Connect Officer Postings Feature (Effective immediately)

What's Different?
View Interpretations Record# 12-732
* Required field
A. Record Information
1. Record# 2. Primary Committee Responsible 3. Record Level 4. Record Sub-Type *
12-732 BPV SC-III MF&E SG Stds Comm Proposal Interpretations
Committees Involved in This Record

5. Board 6. Standards Committee
Board on NCS BPV III
7. Sub-Tier Committee
None
8. Record Established: 9. Last Updated By: 10. Last Updated On:

04/30/12 StinsonJ 02/13/13
B. Record Description
1. Subject *
ASME BPV III, Division 1, Subsection NF
2. Proposed Question(s) and Reply(ies)

Question 1 (modified): Is it the intent of NF-2120 to allow the use of nuts suitable for the mating bolt as stated in the bolting
specification in applications covered by Subsection NF?
Proposed reply 1: Yes.
Question 2 (modified): Is it the intent of NF-2120 to allow the use of SA194 and SA563 nuts for use with compatible bolts in
applications covered by Subsection NF?
Proposed reply 2: Yes.
3. Explanation *
Various nut specification were previously included in the earlier Code stress tables (Table I-13.3). During the reorganization of these
tables, the nut specifications were removed. Some Code Sub-sections incorporated paragraphs to allow use of certain nut
specifications, specifically NB-, NC-, and ND-2128. Subsection NF has a current action (Record #10-1805) to also include allowed nut
specifications which will satisfy future needs.
Material specifications for bolts in Section II list nut specifications which are accepted for use with specific bolt materials. This provides
detailed guidance for nut and bolt compatibility. For example:
1. SA325 recommends A563 nuts.
2. SA307 lists suitable nuts as A563.
3. SA193 states that nuts shall conform to A194.
Conversely, nut specification SA563 details a nut and bolt suitability guide for proper nut/bolt combinations.
4. Summary of Changes
None
C. File Attachments
Page 5 of 112
http://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/SearchAction.cfm?TrackingNumber=732&YearOpened=... 5/2/2013
1. Proposal File
(626KB) View Current Proposal File - Interpretation Letter Received
2. Background Material File

(835KB) View Current Background Material File
3. Committee Correspondence File

None
View/Manage File Attachments
D. Project Administrative Manager

1. Staff Contact
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
2. Staff Notes
None
E. Record Creator
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
F. Project Technical Manager

1. Project Manager *
Stinson, Jon
jon.stinson@us.lisega.com
(603)630-8341
2. Project Manager Notes

None
G. Sub-Tier Committee Level

1. Original Inquirer Contact Information
Lewis Rogers
LISEGA Inc
370 East Dumplin Valley Road
Kodak, TN 37764
Tel: (865) 940-5200
Fax.
2. Project Team Name 3. Project Team Members

None None
4. Subcommittee Item History

None
H. Additional Committee information

1. Codes Affected by Proposed Revision 2. Related Committee Records
BPVC-III-NCA Interp 10-1805 BPV SC-III Supports WG Board Approved
3. Proposal Keywords
4. Secondary Committee[s] w/Related Actions
Page 6 of 112
Pending Committees Committees Responded
5. Type (Nuclear Only)

None
6.Text of Subordinate Group Negatives 7.Subordinate Group Action Date

01/01/00
I. Additional Standards Committee information

1. Standards Committee Description 1 2. Standards Committee Action 1 3. Committee Action Date 1
None None None

None None None
7. Addenda/Edition Year
None
J. Editor Input
1. Editor Acceptance of Proposed Revision Attachment
N/A
2. Editorial Review
(Activated only if ItemLevel = Board Approved)
Has not yet been reviewed by the editor for publication
3. Editor Notes
Editor's Fields Last Updated By:
K. Latest Ballot
Ballot#:
13-462
Ballot Level: Standards Committee
Final Record Status: Disapproved
Date Opened: 03/07/13
Date Closed:04/19/13
Record Status Date: 04/19/2013
Description:
Section III Records from the February 2013 meeting in Los Angeles for BPV III Standards Committee Ballot
Voting Results:
Ballot 13-462 is now closed with the following BPV III voting results:
Record 09-1866 received 23 approved, 4 disapproved, 0 abstention, 0 not voting and 10 not returned.
Page 7 of 112
Based on the results above, 12-1961 and 13-45 proceed. All other records do not proceed. The project managers are asked to
respond to the ballot comments, revise the proposals and contact the secretary for issuance of subsequent ballots.
Comments & Negatives Posted for Ballot#: 13-462
DeublerR (Approved) Response:

Date Posted: 04/09/13 Date Posted: 04/04/13
12-732 Approved The hyphen should be deleted from Sub- Agreed.
section in two places.
EberhardtA (Disapproved)
Date Posted: 04/07/13
We have a potential error trap again in that the proposal given
in the record does not match the proposal in the proposal file.
The proposal file should be revised to match the proposal in
the record. The original letter can be moved to background or
the correspondence file.
MatthewsD (Approved) Response:

I am assuming that the Code change that is required for intent Thank you for your comment. Yes, your assumption is right.
interpretations is satisfied by record 10-1895. Please confirm. However, the correct record number is 10-1805 for the Code
change.
MatthewsD (Follow-Up Response)

Thank you. This response resolves my comment.
L. Ballot History
1. Board Ballot History
None
2. Standards Committee Ballot History

Ballot#:
13-462 Please click on the Ballot# button to view comments / negatives for this ballot.
Date Closed: 04/19/13
Description:
Voting Results:
Page 8 of 112
Ballot#:
Description:
Section III Records from the May 2012 meeting in Nashville, TN for BPV III Standards Committee Ballot
Voting Results:
Record 11-1427 received 17 approved, 12 disapproved, 0 abstentions, 0 not voting and 8 not returned.
Based on the results above, 11-643 and 12-825 proceed to BNCS procedural review; all other items do not proceed. The project
managers are asked to respond to the ballot comments, revise the proposals and contact the secretary for issuance of subsequent
ballots.
3. SC Ballot History
None
M. ANSI Level
No ANSI information is available at this time
N. Publications Level
No Publications Level Information is available at this time.
Copyright 1996-2010 ASME International. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
Page 9 of 112
Inquiry 12-732
Page 10 of 112
Page 11 of 112
Page 12 of 112
Page 13 of 112
Page 14 of 112
Page 15 of 112
Page 16 of 112
Page 17 of 112
Page 18 of 112
Page 19 of 112
Page 20 of 112
C&S Connect - View 12-896 Component Record Form Page 1 of 6
C&S Connect

What's Different?
View Component Record# 12-896
* Required field
12-896 BPV SC-III SGGR Stds Comm Proposal Intent Interp & Prop Rev

None

05/21/12 BykA 05/09/13
1. Subject *
Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1: Material Certification
UPDATE: 13-Feb-13
The proposal file consists of two parts:
Part 1: The intent inquiry with proposed reply.

Part 2: The proposed revision to NCA-3862.1(g).
2. Proposal
Part 1:
Question:
Is it the intent of NCA-3862.1(g) to allow a Certificate of Compliance to be provided in lieu of a Certified Material Test Report for 1 in.
(25mm) outside diameter and less tubes (except heat exchanger tubes), tube fittings, and materials for valves with tube end
connections?
Response:
Yes.
Part 2:
Proposed Text NCA-3862.1(g)
(g) A Certificate of Compliance with the material specification, grade, class, and heat treated condition, as applicable, may be
provided in lieu of a Certified Material Test Report for the following, as applicable:
(1) NPS (DN 20) and less: pipe, pipe fittings, pipe flanges, and materials for valves
(2) 1 in. (25 mm) outside diameter and less: tubes (except heat exchanger tubes), tube fittings, and materials for valves
(3) bolting 1 in. (25 mm) and less
UPDATED: 09-May-13

3. Explanation *
Page 21 of 112
http://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/SearchAction.cfm?TrackingNumber=896&YearOpened... 5/13/2013
Current Code language in NCA-3862.1(g) expresses size limitations for "pipe, fittings, flanges, materials for valves and tubes (except
heat exchanger tubes)" in terms of NPS (nominal pipe size). Tubing is not characterized by NPS, instead it is generally specified as a
nominal outside diameter and wall thickness. The intent inquiry will revise the wording of NCA-3862.1(g) to clearly state the limitations
of providing Certificates of Compliance in lieu of CMTRs for tube and tube fittings material in terms of outside diameter

Modified language of NCA-3862.1(g) to clarify material certification requirements for tube and tube fittings.

C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(85KB) View Current Proposal File - Updated 4-22-2013: Revised proposal to address concerns identified on ballot 13-462.


None

1. Staff Contact
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
2. Staff Notes
None
E. Record Creator
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539

Smith, Clayton
Clayton.T.Smith@Fluor.com
(864)517-1387

The original inquiry submitted to ASME was stated as follows:
Proposed Question: Expression of pipe size is NPS, and expression of tube size is dimension of out diameter. Pipe out diameter of
NPS 3/4 is 26.7mm, and tube out diameter of 3/4 is 19.05mm. May A Certificate of Compliance be provided in lieu of a CMTR for
material 26.7mm and less(tubes, tube fittings, valves jointed with tubes) ?
Proposed response: Yes.
Since tube and tube fitting sizes were not clearly addressed, this item was reopened as an intent inquiry to clarify Code requirements.
Page 22 of 112
UPDATE: 13-Feb-13

UPDATE: 22-April-13
Revised proposal to address all concerns identified on ballot 13-462.

H.Y. Moon
e-mail: mhy@hy-lok.com

None None

The current attached proposal file (as of 2/12/2012) was discussed and brought to a voice vote at WG - Quality Assurance,
Certification & Stamping (SGGR-BPV III). The results of the vote are as follows: All present members approved of the full action
(revised inquiry wording and revised Code language), 0 abstentions / non-voting.
UPDATE 2/13/13: Based on discussion at Subgroup General Requirements (SGGR), the record was updated to indicate there are two
parts: Part 1 - Intent Inquiry, Part 2: Code Revision. The proposal file was also updated to more clearly reflect the separate parts of
this action. A motion was adopted by voice vote (unanimous approval) to move forward the current proposal file (13-Feb-13) as
worded.
UPDATE 2/13/13: Revised wording of intent inquiry and proposed Code change to address issues brought forward at Interpretations
meeting.
Updated 2-14-2013: Revised wording of intent and proposed Code change to address comments received at BPV III.
Updated 4-22-2013: Revised proposal to address all concerns identified on ballot 13-462.

BPVC-III-NCA Interp
Certification
Fabrication
Materials
Nuclear
Scope - General Requirements


None

01/01/00

None None None
Page 23 of 112

None None None
None
J. Editor Input
N/A
2. Editorial Review
3. Editor Notes
K. Latest Ballot
Ballot#:
13-462RC1
Final Record Status: Pending
Description:
Section III Record 12-896 for recirculation ballot.
Voting Results:
Ballot 13-462RC1 is now closed with the following voting results for record 12-896:
BPV III: 25 approved, 0 disapproved, 0 abstention, 0 not voting and 5 not returned.
Based on the results above Record 12-896 proceeds. The project manager is asked to respond to the ballot comments, revise the
proposals and contact the secretary for issuance of subsequent ballots.
Comments & Negatives Posted for Ballot#: 13-462RC1
YonekawaR (Comment) Response:

The interpretation and code change are based on the premise Mr. Yonekawa,
that it was the original intent that the size limitation for when a Thank you for your comments. This very issue was presented
C of C might be provided was based on the OD of the by the Inquirer as well as a main point in our discussions in
pipe/tube. I don't see any intent of that concept in the words WG-QACS, SGGR, and in our over 45 min conversation in
provided in the code or in the background. The intent could just BPV III last February. To this end, a consensus was reached
as easily have been for the size limit to have been based on that the original intent of the current NCA-3862.1 (g) words:
the cross sectional area of the leak path in the event of a break for material NPS (DN 20) and less (pipe, fittings, flanges,
in the line. Thus, rather than equalizing the ODs, it would be materials for valves and tubes except heat exchanger tubes),
more appropriate to equalize the IDs and an increase of the took into account the fact that NPS for pipe has an ID of
tube size from 3/4" to 1" would not be a correct application of 19.5 mm and an OD was 26.7mm, therefore with the
the original intent. understanding that Tubes are ordered and measured by the
OD, the consensus that the original intent of NCA-3862.1 was
I could accept that we want to change the requirement, but it to allow Tubes with an OD of 1 (25.4mm) to be provided with
does not seem to me to be obvious that the intent of the words a COC.
that we are about to change is being clarified or revised. My
concern is that we may be about to revise this particular code
requirement by interpretation.
L. Ballot History
Page 24 of 112
CSConnectRecord#12896
ProposalFile
PART1:INTENTINQUIRY
Proposedrevisiontowordingofinquiry:
Question:
IsittheintentofNCA3862.1(g)toallowaCertificateof
CompliancetobeprovidedinlieuofaCertifiedMaterialTest
Reportfor1in.(25mm)outsidediameterandlesstubes
(exceptheatexchangertubes),tubefittings,andmaterialsfor
valveswithtubeendconnections?
Response:
Yes.

Page1of2
Page 25 of 112
CSConnectRecord#12896
ProposalFile
PART2:CODEREVISION
ProposedrevisiontoCodelanguage,NCA3862.1(g):
CurrentText ProposedText
(g)ACertificateofCompliancewith (g)ACertificateofCompliancewith
thematerialspecification,grade, thematerialspecification,grade,
class,andheattreatedcondition,as class,andheattreatedcondition,as
applicable,maybeprovidedinlieuof applicable,maybeprovidedinlieuof
aCertifiedMaterialTestReportfor aCertifiedMaterialTestReportfor
materialNPS(DN20)andless thefollowing,asapplicable:
(pipe,fittings,flanges,materialsfor
(1)NPS(DN20)andless:
valvesandtubesexceptheat
pipe,pipefittings,pipeflanges,and
exchangertubes),bolting1in.(25
materialsforvalves
mm)andless,asapplicable.
(2)1in.(25mm)outside
diameterandless:tubes(exceptheat
exchangertubes),tubefittings,and
materials for valves
(3)bolting1in.(25mm)and
less
Page2of2
Page 26 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1021 BPV SC-III SG-D SC Proposal Interpretations

None

06/11/12
1. Subject *
Design Fatigue Curve for Martensitic Stainless Steel (2011a SECTION III, DIVISION 1, APPENDIX I)

Question: Does the design fatigue curve of FIG. I-9.1 apply to martensitic stainless steels?
Reply (Proposed): Yes.
3. Explanation *
Background Information:
The related descriptions in the Code are as follows:
NB-3222.4(c)
The strain cycling fatigue data are represented by design fatigue strength curves of Figs. I-9.0.
Appendix III, III-2200
Figure I-9.1 is applicable to the carbon and low alloy steels;
Figs. I-9.2 and I-9.3 are applicable to the high alloy steels and nonferrous alloys listed in Section II, Part D, Subpart 1, Tables 2A and
2B;
Appendix I
FIG. I-9.1 DESIGN FATIGUE CURVES FOR CARBON, LOW ALLOY, AND HIGH TENSILE STEELS FOR METAL TEMPERATURES
NOT EXCEEDING 700F
FIG. I-9.2 DESIGN FATIGUE CURVES FOR AUSTENITIC STEELS, NICKEL-CHROMIUM-IRON ALLOY, NICKEL-IRON-
CHROMIUM ALLOY, AND NICKEL-COPPER ALLOY FOR TEMPERATURES NOT EXCEEDING 800F From the above descriptions,
it is unclear which curve applies to martensitic stainless steels.
On the other hand, in table 3-F.1 of Section VIII, Division 2, Annex 3-F, a fatigue curve for series 4XX steels is categorized together
with those for carbon, low alloy, and high tensile strength steels.
So it is considered suitable that FIG. I-9.1, the design fatigue curve for carbon, low alloy, and high tensile steels also apply to
martensitic stainless steels.
None
C. File Attachments
Page 27 of 112
Inquiry 12-1021
Allyson B. Byk
From: kosei.umemori.cu@hitachi.com
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 1:36 AM
To: Steven J. Rossi
Subject: Inquiry for Code Interpretation
Attn:SecretaryofASMEBoilerandPressureVesselCommittee
I'msendingthisemailforCodeInterpretation.
Thefollowingistheinquiry.
Yourreplywouldbehelpfulforus.
Sincerely,
Purpose:CodeInterpretation
Subject:DesignFatigueCurveforMartensiticStainlessSteel(2011aSECTIONIII,DIVISION1,APPENDIXI)
Question:DoesthedesignfatiguecurveofFIG.I9.1applytomartensiticstainlesssteels?
Reply(Proposed):Yes.
BackgroundInformation:
TherelateddescriptionsintheCodeareasfollows:
NB3222.4(c)
ThestraincyclingfatiguedataarerepresentedbydesignfatiguestrengthcurvesofFigs.I9.0.
AppendixIII,III2200
FigureI9.1isapplicabletothecarbonandlowalloysteels;
Figs.I9.2andI9.3areapplicabletothehighalloysteelsandnonferrousalloyslistedinSectionII,PartD,Subpart1,
Tables2Aand2B;
AppendixI
FIG.I9.1DESIGNFATIGUECURVESFORCARBON,LOWALLOY,ANDHIGHTENSILESTEELSFORMETAL
TEMPERATURESNOTEXCEEDING700F
FIG.I9.2DESIGNFATIGUECURVESFORAUSTENITICSTEELS,NICKELCHROMIUMIRONALLOY,NICKELIRON
CHROMIUMALLOY,ANDNICKELCOPPERALLOYFORTEMPERATURESNOTEXCEEDING800FFromtheabove
descriptions,itisunclearwhichcurveappliestomartensiticstainlesssteels.
Ontheotherhand,intable3F.1ofSectionVIII,Division2,Annex3F,afatiguecurveforseries4XXsteelsiscategorized
togetherwiththoseforcarbon,lowalloy,andhightensilestrengthsteels.
SoitisconsideredsuitablethatFIG.I9.1,thedesignfatiguecurveforcarbon,lowalloy,andhightensilesteelsalso
applytomartensiticstainlesssteels.
1
Page 28 of 112
Inquiry 12-1021
*******************************************
KoseiUmemori
FirstDesignSection
NuclearEquipmentDesignDepartment
HitachiGENuclearEnergy,Ltd.
HitachiWorks
22,Omikacho,5chome,Hitachishi,Ibarakiken,3191221,Japan
Tel:+81294555154
Fax:+81294559915
Email:kosei.umemori.cu@hitachi.com
*******************************************
2
Page 29 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1042 BPV III Stds Comm Proposal Interpretations

BPV SC-III SG-D

06/13/12
1. Subject *
BPV Section III, para. NF 3322.8(c)(4)(a)

Question:
BPV III, NF 3322.8(c)(4)(a) requires: The diameter of the pin shall not be less than seven?eighths of the width of the body of the
eyebar. Is this requirement necessary when both the pin and eyebar can meet the stress requirements of Subsection NF after
detailed stress calculations?
Proposed reply:
No.
3. Explanation *
The proposal will interpret Section III, para. NF 3322.8(c)(4)(a).
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(205KB) View Current Proposal File

None

None
Page 30 of 112
Inquiry 12-1042
Subject:BPVSectionIII,para.NF3322.8(c)(4)(a)
Background(sketch):

Question:
BPVIII,NF3322.8(c)(4)(a)requires:Thediameterofthepinshallnotbelessthanseveneighthsofthe
widthofthebodyoftheeyebar.Isthisrequirementnecessarywhenboththepinandeyebarcanmeet
thestressrequirementsofSubsectionNFafterdetailedstresscalculations?
Proposedreply:
No.
Page 31 of 112
CIWG Shanghai Meeting-2012
Achievement of the Meeting

Issue 3-2
ASME-NF 3322.84a requires: The diameter of the pin shall
not be less than seven-eighths of the width of the body of the eyebar.
Is this requirment necessary when both the pin and eye-bar can meet
the stress requirements in NF after detail stress calculations?
CIWG answer: NO.
2012-6-13 -14-
Page 32 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1307 BPV SC-III MF&E SG SC Proposal Interpretations

None

07/30/12 BykA 01/22/13
1. Subject *
Section III, NE-6225 (2001 Code Edition through 2002 Addenda) Examination of
Inaccessible Welds

Question 1: Is the vacuum box test for leak tightness of inaccessible welds as permitted in NE-6225(d) considered a final test as
described in NCA 5280?
Proposed Response 1: No
Question 2: If a vacuum box test is used to examine inaccessiblle pressure retaining welds on a containment vessel for leak tightness
per NE-6225(d), is the ANI permitted to witness some of the vacuum box tests and check the examination and test records of the
balance of the inaccessible welds to determine the acceptability of the welds as allowed for in NCA-5270 Examinations and Tests?
Proposed Response 2: Yes
3. Explanation *
Background: These questions pertain to the pneumatic testing of a large field erected ASME Section III, Division 1, Subsection NE
containment vessel. This inquiry seeks to confirm that the vacuum box test for leak tightness of inaccessible welds as permitted in NE-
6225(d) is not considered a final test as described in NCA-5280 as the test is not conducted at the test pressure nor is it the final
hydrostatic or pneumatic test. Since the vacuum box test is not a final test the Inspector is permitted to check the examination and test
records of those joints where he was not able to witness the actual examination.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(87KB) View Current Proposal File - 11-27-12
Page 33 of 112
Inquiry 12-1307
Page 34 of 112
Page 35 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1331 BPV SC-III SGGR SC Proposal Interpretations

None

08/03/12
1. Subject *
BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3251

Inquiry : For procurement of internal parts of nuclear valves (pressure retaining parts) is it mandatory to provide to the Manufacturer of
the valve a Design Specification certified by a Registered Professional Engineer ? (NCA-3251)
3. Explanation *
Background information: In NPP Cernavoda - Romania, we procured and installed a nuclear class 3 valve, based on a Design
Specification certified by Romanian engineers who are very familiar with ASME Code and they are certified as Design engineers by
the Romanian State Inspection for Control and Approval of Boilers, Pressure Vessels and Hoisting Equipment (ISCIR) and they are
similar to RPEs. In Romania we do not have a Registered Professional Engineer, qualified in accordance with the requirements of
Appendix XXIII of ASME Code, Section III, Appendices. In this moment, we can not procure internal parts for this valve ( pressure
retaining parts), because the Manufacturer is requiring a certified valve specification sheet to meet the requirements of the Authorized
Nuclear Inspector.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 36 of 112
Inquiry 12-1331
Allyson B. Byk
From: Corneliu Minu <Corneliu.MInu@cne.ro>

Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 6:16 AM
To: Allyson B. Byk
Cc: 'teo_lou@yahoo.com'; 'minu_corneliu@yahoo.com'
Subject: FW: Redir.: FW: ASME Code ,Section III, Subsection NCA
Attachments: NCA-3251.doc
Dear Mrs. Allyson Byk,
I revised my question, in accordance with your advice and I hope that is "clearly and explicitly described".
Inquiry : For procurement of internal parts of nuclear valves (pressure retaining parts) is it mandatory to
provide to
the Manufacturer of the valve a Design Specification certified by a Registered Professional
Engineer ? (NCA-3251)
Background information: In NPP Cernavoda - Romania, we procured and installed a nuclear class 3 valve, based on a
Specification
certified by Romanian engineers who are very familiar with ASME Code and they are cer
Design engineers
by the Romanian State Inspection for Control and Approval of Boilers, Pressure Vess
Hoisting Equipment
(ISCIR) and they are similar to RPEs. In Romania we do not have a Registered Professional E
qualified
in accordance with the requirements of Appendix XXIII of ASME Code, Section III, Appendices.
In this moment, we can not procure internal parts for this valve ( pressure retaining parts),
because the Manufacturer
is requiring a certified valve specification sheet to meet the requirements of the Authorized
Nuclear Inspector.
I thank you for your kindness and I look forward to the Commission's response.
Best regards,
Corneliu Minu
------Mesaj original------
De la: Teodor Lazar <teo_lou@yahoo.com>
To: "Corneliu Minu" <minu_corneliu@yahoo.com>
Cc: <anca.rimniceanu@cne.ro>
1
Page 37 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SGGR
BPV SC-III SG-D
BPV SC-III Vessels WG
BPV SC-III CSS WG

08/07/12
1. Subject *
Section III, Division 1, Paragraph NB-1132, Permanent attachments within the reactor vessel
that do not perform a structural function.

Question: As defined in Paragraph NB-1132.1(c), can a non-pressure-retaining permanent structure attached to the inside of a reactor
vessel be specified as a non-structural attachment if it does not perform a structural function?
Reply: Yes
3. Explanation *
Paragraph NB-ll32 defines the boundaries between the component and attachments. Per NBll32.1(a) an attachment is an element in
contact or connected to the inside or outside ofthe pressure retaining portion of the component. NB-l132.1 (c) (1) defines examples of
attachments with a structural function. This Sub subparagraph implies that a permanent structure attached to the inside of
a reactor vessel (i.e. permanent attachment) shall have a structural function. Structural attachments can have either a pressure
retaining or a non-pressure retaining function [NB-l132.1 (b)].
The implication that a permanent attachment shall have a structural function is further clarified by review of Sub sub article NB-2l90
(Non-Pres sure-Retaining Material). NB-2l90(a) defines the scope of non-pres sure-retaining material to include material in the
component support load path. This would include component supports (Subsection NF) or core support structures (Subsection NG).
Paragraph NG-2l2l specifies that core support structures or internal structures (when specified in the design
specification), shall meet the requirements of Article NG-2000.
In summary, the ASME Code defines a non-pres sure-retaining structural function specifically as either material in the component
support load path, material used as a core support structure or an internal structure (when specified in the design specification).
Hence a permanent attachment inside the reactor vessel which does not have a non-pres sure-retaining structural function can be a
non-structural attachment.
None
Page 38 of 112
Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 Inquiry 12-1349
2012 Westinghouse Page 39 of 112

Electric Company L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
Inquiry 12-1349
Page 40 of 112
Inquiry 12-1349
Page 41 of 112
Inquiry 12-1349
Page 42 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III Des Mthd WG
BPV SC-III Vessels WG

08/10/12
1. Subject *
Section III, Division 1, NB-3228.4 (c)

Inquiry: When performing a plastic fatigue analysis, subsequent to calculating the alternating stress with the maximum principal total
strain range and the modulus of elasticity of the material at the mean temperature of the cycle per NB-3228.4 (c), is it required to
adjust for the effects of elastic modulus per NB-3222.4 (e)(4).
Reply: No
3. Explanation *
Background for requested Code Interpretation:
NB-3228.4 (c) requires using the modulus of elasticity of the material at the mean temperature of the cycle when calculating the
alternating stress for a plastic fatigue analysis. It is unclear whether or not the correction for elastic modulus per NB-3222.4 (e) (4) is
required.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 43 of 112
Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 Inquiry 12-1406
Westinghouse Electric Company

1000 Westinghouse Dr.
Cranberry Township, PA 16066, USA
Allyson Byk
ASME Section III Secretary Direct tel: 412-374-3631
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee Direct fax: 724-940-8565
Three Park Avenue e-mail: marletse@westinghouse.com
New York, NY 10016-5990
Email: byka@asme.org
Ref: LTR-MRCDA-12-134
August 9, 2012
Subject: Request for ASME Code Section III Interpretation Regarding Application of Elastic
Modulus at Mean Temperature for Plastic Fatigue Analysis
References:
(1) American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section
III, 2010 Edition including 2011 Addenda.
Dear Ms. Allyson Byk,
Please see below a request for a Code Interpretation. Please forward to the appropriate ASME B&PV
Code Section III Committees for action. Your prompt consideration of this matter is greatly
appreciated. The applicable ASME Code Section III excerpts are shown in Appendix A.
Requested Code Interpretation:

Subject: Section III, Division 1, NB-3228.4 (c)
Inquiry: When performing a plastic fatigue analysis, subsequent to calculating the alternating stress with
the maximum principal total strain range and the modulus of elasticity of the material at the mean
temperature of the cycle per NB-3228.4 (c), is it required to adjust for the effects of elastic modulus per
NB-3222.4 (e)(4).
Reply: No
2012 WestinghousePage
Electric44 of 112
Company L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.
Inquiry 12-1406 Page 2 of 3
August 9, 2012
Background for requested Code Interpretation:

NB-3228.4 (c) requires using the modulus of elasticity of the material at the mean temperature of the
cycle when calculating the alternating stress for a plastic fatigue analysis. It is unclear whether or not the
correction for elastic modulus per NB-3222.4 (e) (4) is required.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Stephen Marlette P.E.

Principal Engineer
Major Reactor Component Design and Analysis Group
Westinghouse Electric Company
Cranberry Township, PA 16066
Phone: +1 (412) 374-3631
Fax: +1 724-940-8565
Email: marletse@westinghouse.com
Page 45 of 112
Inquiry 12-1406 Page 3 of 3
August 9, 2012
Appendix A Applicable ASME Code Section III Excerpts

(from 2010 Edition including the 2011 Addenda)
NB-3228.4 Shakedown Analysis.
(c) In evaluating stresses for comparison with fatigue

allowables, the numerically maximum principal total
strain range shall be multiplied by onehalf the modulus
of elasticity of the material (Section II, Part D, Subpart 2,
Tables TM) at the mean value of the temperature of the
cycle.
NB-3222.4 Analysis for Cyclic Operation.
(e) Procedure for Analysis for Cyclic Loading.
(4) Effect of Elastic Modulus. Multiply Salt (as determined

in NB-3216.1 or NB-3216.2) by the ratio of the
modulus of elasticity given on the design fatigue curve to
the value of the modulus of elasticity used in the analysis
Enter the applicable design fatigue curve of Figs. I9.0 at
this value on the ordinate axis and find the corresponding
number of cycles on the abscissa. If the service cycle being
considered is the only one which produces significant
fluctuating stresses, this is the allowable number of cycles.
Page 46 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

09/18/12
1. Subject *
BPV Section III, DIvision 1, NB-3226

QUESTION: Is the intent of ASME Section III, NB-3226 to allow the tolerance of 6% for pressure testing without recalculation of
resulting stresses for all Class 1 Components?
ANSWER: Yes
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret Section III, Division 1, NB-3226.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 47 of 112
http://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/SearchAction.cfm?TrackingNumber=1623&YearOpene... 10/25/2012
Inquiry 12-1623
PRESSURETESTINGTOLERANCEFORCLASS1COMPONENTS(OTHERTHANVESSELS)
BACKGROUND:TheperformanceofpressuretestinginthefieldforClass1components(including
pipingsystems)requiresatolerancetoallowforfluctuationinthetestpressure.Therequirementsfor
maximumtestpressureforClass1componentsareprovidedinNB6222(reproducedbelow).
NB-6222 Maximum Permissible Test Pressure
The stress limits specified in NB-3226 shall be used in

determining the maximum permissible test pressure.
ThereferencetoNB3226isrelatedtotestinglimits.However,asshowninthetwoexcerptsbelow,the
languageinNB3226wasrevisedin1998.Inthisrevision,thelanguagewaschangedsuchthatitrefers
onlytovessels.Thisraisesthequestionofwhetherthistoleranceisstillintendedtoapplyto
componentsotherthanvessels.Ifthe6%toleranceisnotapplicable,whattolerancemaybeusedfor
componentsotherthanvessels?
1995/1997
Page 48 of 112
Inquiry 12-1623
1998/1999
QUESTION:IstheintentofASMESectionIII,NB3226toallowthetoleranceof6%forpressuretesting
withoutrecalculationofresultingstressesforallClass1Components?
ANSWER:Yes
ProposedCodechangeinNB3226:
NB3226TestingLimits
Theevaluationofpressuretestloadings(NCA2142.3)shallbeinaccordancewith(a)through(e)below,
exceptthattheserulesdonotapplytotheitemsinNB3500.
(a)Ifthecalculatedpressureatanypointinavesselcomponent,includingstatichead,exceedsthe
requiredtestpressuredefinedinNB6221orNB6321bymorethan6%,theresultingstressesshallbe
Page 49 of 112
Inquiry 12-1623
calculatedusingalltheloadingsthatmayexistduringthetest.Thestressallowablesforthissituation
aregivenin(b)and(c)below.
(b)Forhydrostaticallytestedcomponentsvessels,thegeneralprimarymembranestressintensityPm
shallnotexceed90%ofthetabulatedyieldstrengthSyattesttemperature.Forpneumaticallytested
componentsvessels,Pmshallnotexceed80%ofthetabulatedyieldstrengthSyattesttemperature.
(c)Foreitherhydrostaticallyorpneumaticallytestedvesselscomponents,theprimarymembraneplus
bendingstressintensityPm+Pbshallnotexceedtheapplicablelimitsgivenin(1)or(2)below.
Discussion:
TheaboveproposedchangeisconsistentwiththeguidanceinNB6221andNB6222,whichstate:
NB-6221 Minimum Hydrostatic Test Pressure
(a) The installed system shall be hydrostatically tested at not less than 1.25 times the
lowest Design Pressure of any component within the boundary protected by the
overpressure protection devices which satisfy the requirements of NB-7000.
(b) Valves shall be hydrostatically tested in accordance with the rules of NB-3500.
(c) Components shall be hydrostatically tested at not less than 1.25 times their Design
Pressure.
NB-6222 Maximum Permissible Test Pressure
The stress limits specified in NB-3226 shall be used in determining the maximum
permissible test pressure. In multichamber components, pressure may be simultaneously
applied to the appropriate adjacent chamber to satisfy these stress limits.
Page 50 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

10/30/12 BykA 04/29/13
1. Subject *
BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-2223.3

Question: Does preparing a separate forging in accordance with NB-2223 .3 for parts cettified to ASME Section III Class I override
SA508 Paragraph 6.1.6.3 Method 3 in Section II as stated in NB.2122 for the 1986 Edition and subsequent years?
Proposed Reply: Yes.
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-2223.3.
Background: Interpretation lll-1-86-07 was issued in 1985 to respond to a specific situation for material supplied to the 1983 Edition
with Summer 1985 Addenda Code Year. This interpretation overrides NB.2122 which states that the requirements in this Article (NB-
2000) apply in lieu of the material requirements when in conflict. We are trying to determine iflnterpretation III-1-86-07 became
permanent for all Code years going forward since there was no change to subsequent Code wording and no Code Case was issued.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(25KB) View Current Proposal File - Revised request - 4/29/13

(25KB) View Current Background Material File - Revised request - 4/29/13

None
Page 51 of 112
Inquiry 12-1919
Page 52 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1930 BPV SC-III WG-QACS Board Approved Intent Interp & Prop Rev

BPV SC-III CSS WG

11/01/12 BykA 04/08/13
1. Subject *
Section III, Division 1 Paragraph NCA-8322. Core Support Strucuture N Certification At Field sites.

Part 2: The proposed revision to NCA-8322.
2. Proposal
This proposal file consists of two parts:
Subject: Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-8322, Core Support Structure N Certification at Field Sites
Inquiry: For Core Support Structures meeting Subsection NG, is it the intent of NCA-8322 to require an N Certificate Holder to extend
their Certificate of Authorization to a field site, when the N Certificate Holder subcontracts fabrication and installation activities to an
NA/NPT Certificate Holder at the field site or other locations?
Reply: No
Part 2: Proposed revision to NCA-8322.

The code change provides the rules where when the N Certificate Holder subcontracts all final assembly and installation activities to
an NA Certificate Holder at the field site that holds the appropriate Certificate of Authorization for items NOT requiring a pressure test.
This record consists of revising paragraph NCA-8322 to allow the application of the Certification Mark with N designator at field sites
or other locations for items NOT requiring pressure test. The requirements for items NOT requiring pressure test are provided in NCA-
8322.2. The proposal provides the existing paragraph NCA-8322 rules in NCA-8322.1 for application of the certification mark with N
designator at field sites or other locations for items requiring pressure test.
3. Explanation *
Page 53 of 112
Currently paragraph NCA-8322 provides provisions where the N Certificate Holder may apply the Certification Mark with N Designator
to a component in the field without having the N Certificate of Authorization extended to a field site. These provisions apply in cases
where there is a pressure test being performed at an alternate location.
For core support structures constructed in accordance with Section III Subsection NG, using subcontracted site Certificate Holders to
complete fabrication, and are to be N certified in the field, the provisions of Paragraph NCA-8322 are not applicable.
This record (intent interp and code change) provides the rules where when the N Certificate Holder subcontracts all final assembly
and installation activities to an NA Certificate Holder at the field site that holds the appropriate Certificate of Authorization

The code change provides the rules where the N Certificate Holder subcontracts all final assembly and installation activities to an NA
Certificate Holder at the field site that holds the appropriate Certificate of Authorization for items NOT requiring a pressure test.
Currently paragraph NCA-8322 provides provisions where the N Certificate Holder may apply the Certification Mark with N Designator
to a component in the field without having the N Certificate of Authorization extended to a field site for items requiring a pressure test.
This record consists of revising NCA-8322 to allow the application of the Certification Mark with N designator at field sites or other
locations for items NOT requiring pressure test.
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(32KB) View Current Proposal File - Editorially Approved - 2/14/2013

(4949KB) View Current Background Material File - Intial two interps request (record 12-1404)

(87KB) View the Current Committee Correspondence File - ASME interp response to 1st interp (record 12-1404)

1. Staff Contact
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
2. Staff Notes
None
E. Record Creator
Clayton T. Smith, PE, PMP
Clayton.T.Smith@Fluor.com
(864)517-1387

Pleins, Ed
pleinsel@westinghouse.com
(412)374-6876

August 2012 - The first interp submitted under Record 12-1404. The second interpretation was discussed at BPV SC-III WG-QACS.
The WG believed the second interp was viewed to be an intent interp that would requre a code change. Record 12-1930 was
Page 54 of 112
established for the intent interp and supporting code change.

November 6.2012 - Revision 1 of proposed intent interp and corresponding code change approved by SC-III WG-QACS.
November 7, 2012 - Revision 2 of proposed intent interp and corresponding code change approved by SC-III SG-General
Requirements.
November 7, 2012 - SC III Intrep Group reviewed record. Group agreed to move intent interp forward to SC III for letter ballot.
February 12, 2013 - Updated record to reflect negatives and comments as a result of ballot # 12-2602. Revised item to be presented
at the February 2013 code meetings.
February 12, 2013 - Revision 4 as a result of ballot # 12-2602 for the proposed intent interp and corresponding code change approved
by SC-III WG-QACS.
February 13, 2013 - Revision 4 (and 5A) as a result of ballot #12-2602 for the proposed intent interp and corresponding code change
approved by SC-III SG General Requirements (edits made in proposal presentation beteen revisions 4 and 5A).

None

None None

None

BPVC-III-NCA 12-1404 BPV III Stds Comm Approved
BPVC-III-NCA Interp
Certification
Nuclear
Scope - General Requirements


None

01/01/00

None None None

None None None
2012
J. Editor Input
N/A
2. Editorial Review
Page 55 of 112
3. Editor Notes
K. Latest Ballot
Ballot#:
13-592
Ballot Level: Board Procedural
Final Record Status: Approved
Description:
BPV Section III Standards Actions approved since the February 2013 BPV III Standards Committee Meeting.
Voting Results:
Ballot 13-592 is now closed. The voting results are as follows:
For records 09-207, 11-142, 12-1930,12-297, 12-454: 0 Objections, 24 No Objection, and 7 votes not returned.
As a result, all items are approved for publication.
EberhardtA (No Objection) Response:

Unfortunately, there is a discrepancy between the Inquiry in the Thank you for the comment Mr. Eberhardt. In speaking with
record and the inquiry in the proposal file. I believe the version Allyson Byk (SC III BPV Secretary), the proposal file is correct
in the proposal file is not correct. I feel I must object until this and the file reflects the editorial change that was approved
discrepancy is resolved because I am concerned that the unanimously by ASME SC III BPV Committee on Construction
wrong inquiry might be published. of Nuclear Facility Components (see attached correspondence
file for additional information). The current proposal file is the
The version in the proposal file is missing the phrase ", that file that will be used for ASME publication. Once ballot 13-592
holds the appropriate Certificate of Authorization. is closed, Allyson will edit record 12-1930, Section B.2, Part 1
(intent inquiry with proposed reply) to state:
EberhardtA (Follow-Up Response) Subject: Section III, Subsection NCA, Paragraph NCA-8322,
Date Posted: 04/02/13 Core Support Structure N Certification at Field Sites
Based on your posted response and the commitment to edit Inquiry: For Core Support Structures meeting Subsection NG,
Record 12-1930, Section B.2, Part 1 to make it consistent with is it the intent of NCA-8322 to require an N Certificate Holder to
the proposal file, I have changed my vote to "No Objection". extend their Certificate of Authorization to a field site, when the
Thank you for your prompt response to my concern. N Certificate Holder subcontracts fabrication and installation
activities to an NA/NPT Certificate Holder at the field site or
other locations?
Reply: No
With this edit the proposal file and record will be consistent.
Please see the attached correspondence for additional
information.
View Additional Response File
L. Ballot History
Ballot#:
Ballot Level: Board Procedural
Description:
Page 56 of 112
BPV Section III Standards Actions approved since the February 2013 BPV III Standards Committee Meeting.
Voting Results:
Ballot 13-592 is now closed. The voting results are as follows:
For records 09-207, 11-142, 12-1930,12-297, 12-454: 0 Objections, 24 No Objection, and 7 votes not returned.
As a result, all items are approved for publication.

Ballot#:
Description:
Section III Records from the November 2012 meeting in Phoenix, AZ for BPV III Standards Committee Ballot
Voting Results:
Records 08-951 , 09-207 , 11-142 , 11-2237 , 12-1687 , 12-1878 , 12-1994 , 12-297 and 12-887 received 27 approved, 0 disapproved,
0 abstention, 0 not voting and 10 not returned.
Records 11-684 , 12-1366 , 12-1447, 12-200 received 26 approved, 0 disapproved, 1 abstention, 0 not voting and 10 not returned.
Records 09-1507 , 12-298 received 24 approved, 2 disapproved, 1 abstentions, 0 not voting and 10 not returned.
Record 12-1930 received 27 approved, 0 disapproved, 0 abstention, 0 not voting and 10 not returned. (Updated 3/18/2013 - ABB)
Based on the results above, 09-1507 , 12-298 and 12-1930 do not proceed. The project managers are asked to respond to the ballot
comments, revise the proposals and contact the secretary for issuance of subsequent ballots. All other items proceed to BNCS
procedural review.
3. SC Ballot History
None
M. ANSI Level
1. BSR-8 Record#: 1755 2. Date Submitted: 11/28/12
3. Designation: ASME BPVC Section III - 20XX 4. Start Date: 12/14/12 5. End Date: 01/28/13
6. BSR-9 Record#: 1318 7. Date Submitted: 03/21/13 8. Excluded from Submittal
9. Designation: ASME BPVC Section III - 20XX 10. ANSI Approval Date: 04/23/13
N. Publications Level
Publication Event Date
Copyright 1996-2010 ASME International. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
Page 57 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-1972 BPV SC-III MF&E SG Stds Comm Proposal Intent Interpretation

None

11/05/12 BykA 02/22/13
1. Subject *
ASME Section III Div.1, 2011 Addenda and earlier Editions/Addenda, NB, NC, ND, NE,
NF, NG-5521(a)(4)
2. Proposal
Inquiry No. 1:
Is it the intent of paragraph NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5521(a)(4) to require all NDE personnel performing any Code required
Nondestructive Examinations (NDE) regardless of the NDE method to be visually examined for near visual acuity using Jaeger
Number 1 letters in lieu of the Jaeger Number 2 letters required by SNT-TC-1A (2006 edition) paragraph 8.2(1)?
Proposed Reply No. 1:

Yes.
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret ASME Section III Div.1, 2011 Addenda and earlier Editions/Addenda, NB, NC, ND, NE,
NF, NG-5521(a)(4).
See Background information included for further information.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File

Page 58 of 112
None

1. Staff Contact
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
2. Staff Notes
The proposed revision is contained in record 12-454.
E. Record Creator
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539

Jessee, Robert
jesseerm@y12.doe.gov
(865)574-1472

None

Richard R. Stevenson
Chief Engineer and Nuclear QA Manager ASME III Program
Quality Assurance Depa

None None

None

BPVC-III NB 12-454 BPV SC-III MF&E SG Board Approved
BPVC-III NC
BPVC-III ND
BPVC-III NE
BPVC-III NF
BPVC-III NG
BPVC-III-NCA Interp

None
Page 59 of 112
01/01/00

None None None

None None None
None
J. Editor Input
N/A
2. Editorial Review
3. Editor Notes
K. Latest Ballot
Ballot#:
13-462
Description:
Voting Results:
Page 60 of 112
BarnesR (Disapproved)
Mr. Deubler and Mr Gimple's points need to be addressed.
DeublerR (Disapproved)
12-1972 Disapproved The interpretation says it is for earlier
Editions/Addenda but does not specify which ones. It must be
specific and evidence must be included in the background
material that the code was not changed at some point. A
proper code markup proposal must be included. In the
proposed words, Section should be replace by Subsection
GimpleR (Comment)
The Winter 1975 Addenda NX-5521 is the first time Section III
added the requirement for visual examination to use the
Jaeger Number 1 letters in lieu of the Jaeger Number 2 letters
in SNT-TC-1A. In that first addition of this requirement, the
reference was specifically to SNT-TC-1A-1975. Prior to the
Winter 1975 Addenda, there was no statement about visual
acuity in NX-5521.
As long as the question uses SNT-TC-1A-2006, then the

application of the inquiry can only be the 2011 Addenda of
Section III.
JetterR (Disapproved)
I support Deubler's comments
KeatingR (Disapproved)
I support Mr. Deublers comments
SaitoI (Disapproved)
(1) I think that the visual examination means only applicable
performing Visual (VT) nondestructive examinations, because
that the term of visual examination is clearly defined in SEC.
V, Article 9, Appendix I.
SmithCt (Disapproved)
I support the comments provided by Mr. Deubler.
L. Ballot History
None

Ballot#:
Description:
Page 61 of 112
Inquiry 12-1972
October 30, 2012
Secretary
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee
Three Park Avenue
New York, NY 10016-5990
Attention: Allyson Byk
Ref: ASME Section III Div.1, 2011 Addenda and earlier Editions/Addenda, NB, NC, ND, NE,
NF, NG-5521(a)(4) Use of Jaeger Number 1 letters in lieu of the Jaeger Number 2 letters
specified in paragraph 8.2.1 of SNT-TC-1A for the Qualifications and Certification of
Nondestructive Examination personnel
Inquiry No. 1:
Is it the intent of paragraph NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5521(a)(4) to require all NDE personnel
performing any Code required Nondestructive Examinations (NDE) regardless of the NDE
method to be visually examined for near visual acuity using Jaeger Number 1 letters in lieu of
the Jaeger Number 2 letters required by SNT-TC-1A (2006 edition) paragraph 8.2(1)?
Proposed Reply No. 1:

Yes.
Background:
During a recent audit of a Vendor, a question came up as to the intent of the Code regarding the
visual acuity examinations required for the qualifications of NDE personnel. NB, NC, ND, NE,
NF, NG-5521(a)(4) States For visual examination, the Jaeger Number 1 letters shall be used in
lieu of the Jaeger Number 2 letters specified in paragraph 8.2.1 of SNTTC1A. The use of
equivalent type and size letters is permitted. The phrase For Visual examination can refer to
the Visual NDE method an individual will perform or it can refer to the visual acuity
examination an NDE individual is required to have as a pre-requisite to being certified and to
maintain that certification. If it refers to the Visual NDE method an individual will perform, then
the requirement for Jaeger Number 1 letters would be limited to only NDE personnel performing
Visual (VT) nondestructive examinations required by the Code. If it refers to the visual acuity
examination an NDE individual is required to have as a pre-requisite to being certified and to
maintain that certification, then the requirement for Jaeger Number 1 letters would apply to all
NDE personnel regardless of the NDE method they are certified to and not just to NDE
personnel performing Visual (VT) nondestructive examinations required by the Code.
It is important to point out that paragraph 8.2.1 of SNTTC1A 2006 Edition requires Jaeger
Number 2 as the Near Vision Acuity requirement and NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5521(a)(4) is
merely taking exception to that and requiring Jaeger Number 1 letters. However some read that
exception as applicable only to personnel performing Visual (VT) nondestructive examinations
Page 62 of 112
Inquiry 12-1972
required by the Code and others read that exception as applying to all NDE personnel regardless
of the NDE method they are certified to.
It is also important to point out that the Code only requires Visual (VT) nondestructive
examinations in NF and NG since NB, NC, ND, and NE-5000 does not include acceptance
criteria for Visual (VT) examination. Additionally, NX-4123 specifically states that Visual
examination activities that are not referenced for examination by other specific Code paragraphs
and that are performed solely to verify compliance with NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-4000, may
be performed by persons who perform or supervise the work. These visual examinations are not
required to be performed by personnel and procedures qualified to NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-
5500 and NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5100, unless so specified. If the requirements for Jaeger
Number 1 letters only applies to NDE personnel performing Visual (VT) nondestructive
examinations required by the Code, why would NB, NC, ND, and NE have the 5521(a)(4)
exception?
We have discussed this with our AIA and they believe that the requirement for Jaeger Number 1
letters applies to all NDE certified personnel. The Vendor is of the opinion that the requirement
for Jaeger Number 1 letters only applies to NDE personnel performing Visual (VT)
Examinations in accordance with the ASME Section III Code.
Proposed Code Revision:
Revise Paragraph NB, NC, ND, NE, NF, NG-5521 (a)(4) as follows:
For NDE personnel performing any NDE in accordance with this Section, the Near Vision
Acuity requirements specified in paragraph 8.2.1 of SNT-TC-1A shall apply except Jaeger
Number 1 letters shall be used in lieu of the Jaeger Number 2 letters. The use of equivalent type
and size letters is permitted.
Should there be any questions or additional information required, please contact me at

(617) 589-6600 or 781-929-6428 I am planning on attending the Section III inquiry session in
November.
Very truly yours,
Richard R. Stevenson
Chief Engineer and Nuclear QA Manager ASME III Program
Quality Assurance Department
Shaw Nuclear Services, Inc.
Chrono 12-0454
RRS/
Enc. 2 Pages containing paragraph 8.0 from ASNT SNT-TC-1A (2006)
Page 63 of 112
Inquiry 12-1972
Page 64 of 112
Inquiry 12-1972
Page 65 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-2088 BPV SC-III Joint ASME/ACI SC Approved Interpretations

None

11/19/12 StrunkJ 02/19/13
1. Subject *
ASME BPVC Section III, Div.2, Table CC-4552-2, EXEMPTIONS TO MANDATORY PWHT, the first paragraph on Type of Weld reads
All welds, including repair welds, in material 1-1/2 in. (38 mm) and less (2001 edition, 2001 Addenda, to present)

Question (1): For Section III, Division 2, (2001 Edition, 2001 Addenda, to present), does Table CC-4552-2 require PWHT for Category
D welds that are full penetration welds of a portion of the liner plate or the shell plate whose wall thickness is less or equal to 1-1/2 in.
(38 mm) to a penetration or nozzle, provided the requirements of Table CC-4552-2 are followed?
Proposed Reply (1): No.
3. Explanation *
From 2001 edition, 2001 Addenda of ASME Sec. III, Div. 2, Table CC-4552-2 was changed into All welds in material 1-1/2 in. and
less. Previous editions of ASME Sec. III, Div. 2, Table CC-4552-2 excluded the welds joining nozzles or penetrations with an I.D.
greater than 2 in. from exemption to mandatory PWHT.
A proposed Question and Response is included in the Proposal File. It is the same as in 2. above; Proposed Question and Reply. No
Code changes required.
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(15KB) View Current Proposal File - Rev 1 Proposal posted on 2-19-13

Page 66 of 112
InquiryRecNo122088 Rev.1 2/19/13
Inquiry 12-2088
Inquiry
Question (1): For Section III, Division 2, (2001 Edition, 2001 Addenda, to present) does Table
CC-4552-2 require PWHT for Category D welds that are full penetration welds of a portion of the
liner plate or the shell plate whose wall thickness is equal to or less than 1-1/2 in. (38 mm) to a
penetration or nozzle, provided the requirements of Table CC-4552-2 are followed?
Proposed Reply (1): No.
Page 67 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
12-2288 BPV III Stds Comm Proposal Intent Interp & Prop Rev

BPV SC-III MF&E SG

12/26/12
1. Subject *
BPV III, Division 1, NB-6114.3
2. Proposal
Question: Is it the intent of NB-6114.3 to allow the component or appurtenance test to be used in lieu of the material specificatino
required by hydro test, when unqualified material is being qualified per NCA-3855.5?
Proposed Reply: No.
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret BPV III, Division 1, NB-6114.3.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 68 of 112
Inquiry 12-2288
Page 69 of 112
Inquiry 12-2288
Page 70 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
13-291 BPV SC-III SGGR Stds Comm Proposal Intent Interp & Prop Rev

None

02/13/13 AppletonA 02/14/13
1. Subject *
Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1 (b) (2010 Edition and 2011 a Addenda) Certification requirements for source material for welding
material
2. Proposal
PART I - INTENT INTERPRETATION -
Page 1 of the Proposal File
Question:
Is it the intent of NCA-3862.1 (b) that the certification of heat analysis of the source material must be furnished as an identified
attachment to the Certified Material Test Report when all the tests and chemical analyses required by the applicable welding material
specification (SFA Specification) and specific material requirements of Section III (NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG-2400) are performed by the
Material Organization or Certificate Holder issuing the Certified Material Test Report?
Reply :
No.
PART I I CODE REVISION

Page 2 of the Proposal File
Revise NCA-3862.1(b) to add new text:

"For welding materials (NCA-1221.2), in lieu of furnishing the melting mill heat analysis, a chemical analysis of the source material
may be provided in accordance with the requirements of NB-/NC-/ND-/NE-/NF-/NG-2400 of the applicable Subsection . "
3. Explanation *
NCA-3862.1(b) states When required chemical analyses (including melting mill heat analysis), heat treatment, tests, examinations, or
repairs are subcontracted, the approved suppliers certification for the operations performed shall be furnished as an identified
attachment to the Certified Material Test Report. This makes sense for the many SA and SB specifications for which a report of the
heat analysis on the material test report is required.
However, as far as SFA welding materials are concerned, there are no requirements for heat analysis in any SFA specification.
Chemical analysis of bare electrodes for SAW or GMAW and filler wires/straight lengths for GTAW need to be made to meet the
Page 71 of 112
requirements of the applicable SFA Specification and NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG-2432. The required chemical analysis is an analysis of
finished welding material and substantially different from heat analysis during the melting.
Furthermore, in the case of covered electrodes and flux-cored electrodes, SFA Specifications do not specify any requirements for
chemical composition of constituent core wire or sheath strip. The only requirement for analysis of weld deposit applies to covered
electrodes and flux-cored electrodes only require analysis of weld deposit.
Therefore, when a welding Material Organization issuing the Certified Material Test Report purchases wire rods (mill rod coils) from
his approved supplier of source material, and performs all the tests and chemical analysis required by the applicable welding material
specification (SFA Specification) and specific material requirements of Section III(NB/NC/ND/NE/NFNG-2400), attachment of the test
reports with the melting mill heat analysis from its source material supplier is not required.
Revise NCA-3862.1 (b) to clarify requirements for source material heat analysis on CMTRs for welding materials
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
(187KB) View Current Proposal File - Intent with Code Rev. 20130214 mod by BPV III


None

1. Staff Contact
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539
2. Staff Notes
This item replaced 12-932.
E. Record Creator
Allyson Byk
byka@asme.org
(212)591-8539

Appleton, Annemarie
aspaba@aol.com
(973)256-1616

None

Mr. Tetsuro Kawaberi
Kobe Steel, Ltd. Ibaraki Plant
2-19, Higashiunobe-cho,
Ibaraki-city, OSAKA
Page 72 of 112

None None

None

BPVC-III-NCA Interp

None

01/01/00

None None None

None None None
None
J. Editor Input
N/A
2. Editorial Review
3. Editor Notes
K. Latest Ballot
Ballot#:
13-462
Description:
Voting Results:
Page 73 of 112
BarnesR (Disapproved)
I support the rational specifically of Mr. Deubler (Pete you are
becomming a purist) and Mr. Morton
BorterW (Disapproved)
Interprtation is confusing and there is no history of the problem
that caused this request for this Interpretation.
DeublerR (Disapproved)
13-291 Disapproved -The Code change does not justify the
intent interpretation. The Code change only applies to source
material for welding materials, but the interpretation is not clear
that it is limited to weld material. If it was the intent, then would
it not be the intent for all materials? I am not convinced that
this was the intent because NCA-3861(b) requires the
transmittal of all of the certificates and that is not being
changed.
EberhardtA (Disapproved)
I support Mr. Morton's objection. This may impact or apply to
Section III Div. 2 also.
This interpretation should be reviewed by Div. 2, which is also

impacted by NCA material requirements.
HenryJE (Comment)
I agree with the wording of the new text, but its inclusion in
sub-paragraph (b) seems inappropriate. The rest of the sub-
paragraph is referring to certification requirements related to
operations performed by a sub-contractor, but the issue with
weld metal has nothing essential to do with sub-contractors.
Perhaps it should have its own new sub-paragraph.
JetterR (Disapproved)
Page 74 of 112
I support comments by Deubler and Morton
KeatingR (Disapproved)
I support Mr. Deubler and Mr. Mortons objections
ManolyK (Disapproved)
The proposed revision to NCA?3862.1 Material Certification,
reads as follows:
For welding materials (NCA?1221.2), in lieu of furnishing the
melting mill heat analysis, a chemical analysis of the source
material may be provided in accordance with the requirements
of NB?/NC?/ND?/NE?/NF?/NG?2400 of the applicable
Subsection.
The way the revision is worded, if the melting mill heat analysis
is not furnished, the chemical analysis of the source material is
not required because of using the term may be provided. As
such, the revision permits not furnishing either the melting mill
heat analysis nor the chemical analysis of the source material.
MortonD (Disapproved)
I disapprove this action because the revision uses the phrase
NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG. This forces the revision to only be
applicable to Division 1, reinforced by the Division 1 callout
under Subject of the C&S Connect Record. Section III
committees need to start looking at the consequences of code
revisions to the other Section III Divisions.
SaitoI (Disapproved)
I support DeublerR's comments. Thank you.
L. Ballot History
None

Ballot#:
Description:
Voting Results:
Page 75 of 112
Record#13291
PART I INTENT INTERPRETATION

Subject: Section III, Division 1, NCA3862.1 b 2010 Edition and 2011 a Addenda
Question:
Is it the intent of NCA3862.1 b that the certification of heat analysis of the
source material must be furnished as an identified attachment to the Certified
Material Test Report when all the tests and chemical analyses required by the
applicable welding material specification SFA Specification and specific
material requirements of Section III NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG2400 are
performed by the Material Organization or Certificate Holder issuing the
Certified Material Test Report?
Reply :
No.

2/14/20132:12PM Page1of2
Page 76 of 112
Record#13291
PART I I CODE REVISION

NCA3862.1 Material Certification. Proposednewtext

11
(a) The Certified Material Test Report shall include the actual results of all required
chemical analyses, tests, and examinations.
(b) When required chemical analyses (including melting mill heat analysis), heat
treatment, tests, examinations, or repairs are subcontracted, the approved suppliers
certification for the operations performed shall be furnished as an identified attachment to
the Certified Material Test Report. For welding materials (NCA1221.2), in lieu of
furnishing the melting mill heat analysis, a chemical analysis of the source material
may be provided in accordance with the requirements of NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG
2400 of the applicable Subsection . When operations other than chemical analysis, heat
treatment, tests, examination, or repairs, that require maintenance of traceability are
subcontracted, these operations and the approved suppliers performing them shall be listed
on the Certified Material Test Report, or the approved suppliers certification for the operation
may be furnished as an attachment to the Certified Material Test Report.
(c) The Certified Material Test Report shall also include a report of all weld repairs
performed on the material as required by this Section. Radiographic film required for the
examination of material repair welds shall be included as a part of the Certified Material Test
Report, except for those radiographs required for the testing of welding or brazing materials.
(d) When specific times or temperatures (or temperature ranges) of heat treatments are
required by material specifications, they shall be reported. For austenitic stainless steels and
high nickel alloys, a statement of the minimum solution annealing temperature is a sufficient
statement of heat treatment. When specific times and temperatures (or temperature ranges)
are not required by the material specification, a statement of the type of heat treated
condition shall be reported. Additionally, the times and temperatures of postweld heat
treatments of weld repaired materials as required by the fabrication requirements of this
Section shall be reported.
(e) Reporting of actual dimensions and visual examination results is neither required nor
prohibited by this paragraph.
(f) Notarization of the Certified Material Test Report is not required.
(g) A Certificate of Compliance with the material specification, grade, class, and heat
treated condition, as applicable, may be provided in lieu of a Certified Material Test Report for
material NPS 3/4 (DN 20) and less (pipe, fittings, flanges, materials for valves and tubes
except heat exchanger tubes), bolting 1 in. (25 mm) and less, as applicable.
(h) Material identification shall be described in the Certified Material Test Report or
Certificate of Compliance, as applicable. Heat or lot traceability to the Certificate of
Compliance is not required.

2/14/20132:12PM Page2of2
Page 77 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field
13-440 BPV SC-III CIWG SC Proposal Interpretations

BPV SC-III SGGR

02/28/13
1. Subject *
BPV III NCA-3252(c)

Should it be determined by Design Specification (NCA-3252(c)) whether the preservice examinations in ASME B&PV Code Section III
be performed or not?
Proposed Reply: Yes
3. Explanation *
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NCA-3252(c), The Design Specification shall identify those components and/or parts that
require a preservice examination and shall include the following:
(1) Examination
(a) Edition and Addenda of Section XI to be used
(b) category and method, and
(c) qualifications of personnel, procedures, and equipment
(2) Welds
(a) surface conditioning requirements, and
(b) identification/marking system to be used
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5281(a), examination required by NCA-3252(c) shall be completed prior to completion
of the N-5 Data Report. According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5410(b), all required volumetric preservice examinations shall
be performed(after the pressure test of a vessel).
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
Page 78 of 112
Technical Inquiry to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee
Inquiry 13-440
1. Purpose
(Check one of the following)
Revision of present Code rules
New or additional Code rules
Code Case
Code Interpretation
2. Proposed Revisions or Additions / Inquiry and Reply

Inquiry:
Should it be determined by Design Specification(NCA-3252(c)) whether the preservice
examinations in ASME B&PV Code Section III be performed or not? (Proposed Reply: Yes)
3. Statement of Need
This inquiry is to clarify preservice examination in ASME B&PV Code Section III 2010 Edition.
4. Background
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NCA-3252(c), The Design Specification shall
identify those components and/or parts that require a preservice examination and shall include
the following:
(1) Examination
(2) Welds
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5281(a), examination required by NCA-3252(c)
shall be completed prior to completion of the N-5 Data Report. According to ASME B&PV Code
Section III, NB-5410(b), all required volumetric preservice examinations shall be performed(after
the pressure test of a vessel).
5. Inquirer Information
Name Jing Yi E-mail jingyi@snerdi.com.cn
Organization Shanghai Nuclear Engineering Research and Design Institute
Address No.29 Hongcao Road, Shanghai 200233, China
Telephone No. +86 21 61861309 Fax No. +86 21 61860728
Page 79 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SGGR
BPV SC-III MF&E SG

02/28/13
1. Subject *
BPV Section III, NB-5410(b) and NCA-3252(c)

Does the "all required" in ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5410(b) mean required by Design Specification in ASME B&PV Code
Section III, NCA-3252(c)?
Proposed Reply: Yes
3. Explanation *
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NCA-3252(c), The Design Specification shall identify those components and/or parts that
require a preservice examination and shall include the following:
(1) Examination
(2) Welds
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5281(a), examination required by NCA-3252(c) shall be completed prior to completion
of the N-5 Data Report. According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5410(b), all required volumetric preservice examinations shall
be performed(after the pressure test of a vessel).
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
Page 80 of 112
Inquiry 13-442
1. Purpose
Code Case
Code Interpretation

Inquiry:
Does the "all required" in ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5410(b) mean required by Design
Specification in ASME B&PV Code Section III, NCA-3252(c)? (Proposed Reply: Yes)
This inquiry is to clarify ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5410(b) 2010 Edition.
4. Background
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NCA-3252(c), The Design Specification shall
identify those components and/or parts that require a preservice examination and shall include
the following:
(1) Examination
(2) Welds
According to ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB-5281(a), examination required by NCA-3252(c)
shall be completed prior to completion of the N-5 Data Report. According to ASME B&PV Code
Section III, NB-5410(b), all required volumetric preservice examinations shall be performed(after
the pressure test of a vessel).
Name Jing Yi E-mail jingyi@snerdi.com.cn
Page 81 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SG-D
BPV SC-III Piping WG

02/28/13
1. Subject *
BPV III Table NB-3681(a)-1

Does NB 3683.3, and Table NB-3681(a)-1, require that the stress index C3 of straight remote from welds or other discontinuities need
to be considered for straight pipe?
3. Explanation *
Stress index C3 of straight pipe remote from welds or other discontinuities is not listed in Table NB-3681(a)-1. The note under the
table indicates: For indices not listed, see the note referenced at the end of the applicable line. So, according to note (5), NB-3683.3
should be used to calculate this value. But, as documented in NB-3683.3, stress indices of straight pipe should be taken from table
NB-3681(a)-1. So, NB-3683.3 point back to table NB-3681(a)-1, and the value of C3 can not be found in the code.
If C3 is not applicable to straight pipe, may be substituted by other symbols, such as
NA, to show that C3 needs not be considered for straight pipe.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 82 of 112
1. Purpose Inquiry 13-443

Code Case
Code Interpretation

Inquiry:
We wonder whether the following understanding is correct:
In NB 3683.3 TABLE NB-3681(a)-1, the stress index C3 of straight remote from welds
or other discontinuities needs not be considered for straight pipe.
(Proposed Reply: Yes)
This inquiry is to clarify ASME B&PV Code Section III NB 3683.3.
4. Background
Stress index C3 of straight pipe remote from welds or other discontinuities is not listed
in Table NB-3681(a)-1. The note under the table indicates: For indices not listed, see the
note referenced at the end of the applicable line. So, according to note (5), NB-3683.3
should be used to calculate this value. But, as documented in NB-3683.3, stress indices of
straight pipe should be taken from table NB-3681(a)-1. So, NB-3683.3 point back to table
NB-3681(a)-1, and the value of C3 can not be found in the code.
If C3 is not applicable to straight pipe, may be substituted by other symbols, such as
NA, to show that C3 needs not be considered for straight pipe.
Name Bingbing Liang E-mail lbb@snerdi.com.cn

Page 83 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SG-D
BPV SC-III Piping WG

02/28/13
1. Subject *
BPV III NC-3650

Inquiry1:
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-NC 3650. We wonder whether the evaluation of Class 2 Piping Systems can be
carried out in accordance with NC-3218.
Inquiry2:
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-ND 3650 and NC-3300. We wonder whether the evaluation of Class 3 Piping
Systems can be carried out in accordance with NC-3218 following the same procedure as Inquiry1.
3. Explanation *
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-NC 3650. Shall evaluation be carried out in accordance with NC-3218?
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-ND 3650. And there is no referenced provision in NC-3300. It is indicated that
loadings of test condition shall be taken into account in designing a component in ND-3111. So, provisions or referenced provisions
should be provided for evaluating these loadings in ND.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File

Page 84 of 112
Inquiry 13-444
1. Purpose
Code Case
Code Interpretation

Inquiry1:
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-NC 3650. We wonder whether the
evaluation of Class 2 Piping Systems can be carried out in accordance with NC-3218.
Inquiry2:
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-ND 3650 and NC-3300. We wonder
whether the evaluation of Class 3 Piping Systems can be carried out in accordance with
NC-3218 following the same procedure as Inquiry1.
This inquiry is to clarify ASME B&PV Code Section III NC 3650 and ND 3650.
4. Background
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-NC 3650. Shall evaluation be carried out
in accordance with NC-3218?
There is no consideration of Test Limits in ASME-ND 3650. And there is no referenced
provision in NC-3300. It is indicated that loadings of test condition shall be taken into
account in designing a component in ND-3111. So, provisions or referenced provisions
should be provided for evaluating these loadings in ND.
Name Yong Wang E-mail wangy@snerdi.com.cn

Page 85 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SGGR
BPV SC-III MF&E SG

04/12/13
1. Subject *
Section Ill, Division I, NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG/NH-2121 Permitted material specifications (Edition 20I0, Addenda 20II)

Question 1: Can an N/NPT certificate holder with use of unqualified source material under its scope, procure material with co relatable
Material Test Certificate, certified to specification or standard other than ASME, from a stock material manufacturer and qualify the
same to a ASME specification by performing all tests, examination and inspection required by the ASME specification on each piece
of the material.
Reply 1: Yes.
Question 2: Can an N/NPT certificate holder with use of unqualified source material under its scope, procure sheets with co relatable
Material Test Certificate, certified to grade S275JR of AM FCE standard, from a stock material manufacturer and qualify to SA 36 of
ASME Section II A by performing all tests, examination and inspection required as per SA 36 of ASME Section II A on each piece of
the material.
Reply 2: Yes.
3. Explanation *
This propsoal will interpret Section Ill, Division I, NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG/NH-2121 Permitted material specifications (Edition 20I0,
Addenda 20II)
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
Page 86 of 112
Inquiry 13-698
Page 87 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III CSSFHLWTP SG
BPV SC-III Joint ASME/ACI

04/23/13
1. Subject *
: General Test Requirements. Section III, Division 1,Subsections NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG - 2431.1(b); Section III, Division 2 Subsection
CC-2612.1.1(b) and Section III, Division 3, Subsections WB/WC-2431.1(b). 2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda.

Inquiry: For GTAW welding test coupons made in accordance with the General Test Requirements of NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG - 2431.1
(b), CC-2612.1.1(b) and WB/WC-2431.1(b), shall the base material conform to the requirements of Section IX, QW-403.1 and QW-
403.4?
Proposed Reply: No.
3. Explanation *
This propsoal will interpret Section III, Division 1,Subsections NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG - 2431.1(b); Section III, Division 2 Subsection
CC-2612.1.1(b) and Section III, Division 3, Subsections WB/WC-2431.1(b). 2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 88 of 112
Inquiry 13-773
Allyson B. Byk
From: Garbolevsky Alexander - Hartford-Remote-HSBCT <alex_garbolevsky@hsbct.com>

Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:20 AM
To: Allyson B. Byk
Cc: SecretayBPV@asme.org
Subject: Inquiry: General Test Requirements NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG-243.1(b)
Follow Up Flag: Follow up

Due By: Friday, April 19, 2013 5:00 PM
Flag Status: Flagged
DearAllyson:
IwouldliketosubmitthefollowingCodeInterpretationrequestforconsiderationbytheSectionIIIStandards
Committeeatitsearliestopportunity.
Subject:GeneralTestRequirements.SectionIII,Division1,SubsectionsNB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG2431.1(b);SectionIII,
Division2SubsectionCC2612.1.1(b)andSectionIII,Division3,SubsectionsWB/WC2431.1(b).2010Edition,2011
Addenda.
Inquiry:ForGTAWweldingtestcouponsmadeinaccordancewiththeGeneralTestRequirementsof
NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG2431.1(b),CC2612.1.1(b)andWB/WC2431.1(b),shallthebasematerialconformtothe
requirementsofSectionIX,QW403.1andQW403.4?
ProposedReply:No.
Background:
WeldingProcess:GTAW
Weldingmaterial:SFA5.18MER48S6
Basemetalusedfortestweld:A36(P1G1)
Basemetalforproduction:SA516MGrade485(P1G2)
Impacttest:Required
ThelastsentenceofNB2431.1(b)(*andequivalentsubparagraphsnotedinSubjectabove)states:Thebasematerial
shallconformtotherequirementsofSectionIX,QW403.1orQW403.4,asapplicable.isarequirementforelectroslag
welding.
BasemetalusedinfulfillingtheGeneralTestRequirementsforSectionIIIweldtestcouponsforGTAWprocessneednot
conformtoQW403.1orQW403.4because:
1. InthefirstsentenceofNB2431.1(b)*,weldmetaltobeusedforallprocessesexceptelectroslagweldingshall
bedepositedinsuchamannerastoeliminatesubstantiallytheinfluenceofthebasematerialontheresultsof
thetest.SoitisnotrequiredthatbasematerialbethesamePNo.andGroupNo.asbasematerialofproduction
welding.
2. Insecondsentence,basematerialforelectroslagweldingisnotdescribed.Sothelastsentenceisforbase
materialusedwithelectroslagweldingonly.
3. QW403.1andQW403.4arevariablesapplicableforelectroslagwelding.
Pleasecontactmedirectlyshouldyouhaveanyquestionsaboutthisinquiry.
Thankyouforyourconsideration.
1
Page 89 of 112

Alex Garbolevsky, P.E.
Senior Engineer II
Phone and Fax: +1 (508) 875-0710

Cell: +1 (774) 249-2803 [AT&T]
Hartford Office: +1 (860) 722-5098
www.HSBGlobalStandards.com
2
Page 90 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

04/29/13
1. Subject *
BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-4250(c)

Question: Do the requirements of NB-4250(c) apply to weld joint when the inside diameter is physically accessible for back-grooving
and back-welding with subsequent back cladding which makes the counterbore unnecessary?
Propose reply: No.
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret NB-4250(c).
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 91 of 112
Inquiry 13-796
Page 92 of 112
Page 93 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III MF&E SG

04/29/13 LarochelleW 04/30/13
1. Subject *
ASME BPVC Seciton III NB-6114.2, Edition 1998, Addenda 2000 and NCA-8322 Edition 2010, Addenda 2011

Question:
ls it permissible to construct a pump under the responsibility of the N- cerlificate holder, to
fabricate at his location a subassembly and performing the pressure test, to ship his
subassembly to his subcontracted N-type cerlificate holder, who is fabricating the pump
casing, performing the pressure test on the pump casing, marking the pump casing with the
NPT designator, pedorming the shop assembly of the pump by mechanical means and to
perform the stamping with the N designator at subcontractors location?
The pressure test of the subassemblies replaces the component pressure test in accordance
to NCA-8322.The certification of the NVP-1 Data Reporl is performed by the N certificate
holder after the review of the Design Report by owner is available.
Proposed Reply:
Yes, provided all applicable requirements of NCA-8322 and N8-61 14.2 are complied with.
3. Explanation *
This propsoal will interpret NB-6114.2, Edition 1998, Addenda 2000 and NCA-8322 Edition 2010, Addenda 2011
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File
Page 94 of 112
M Inquiry 13-799
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee

Secretary of Gommittee on Construction of
Nuclear Facility Components
Mr. Allyson Byke
bvka@asme.orq
S ecretarv B PV@ a sm e. orq
per air courrier
Two Park Avenue
New York, NY, 10016 - 5990
USA
Redzic Mirnes
Quality Management and Assurance (QMS)
Quality Engineering (QE)
ANDRITZ AG
Stattegger Strasse 18
8045 Graz, Austria
E-N1it: Mirnes. Redzic@andritz.com ra* +43.3'16 .6902-451

DeptrAbt:QMS Phone/rer : +43.3'1 6.69 02'2022
Date/Daturn: 26.04.2013 Paoeiseite: 1 (totat 1 incl oover/Deckblatt)
Subject/Belreffj
lnquiry for interpretation NCA-8322 Edition 2010 Adden da 20'11, N8-61 14.2, dition 1998 Addenda
2000
Dear Mr, Byk,
Enclosed you will find the application for an inquiry for an interpretation wth respect to the use of
the requirements referenced.
lf you need further information to process this inquiry successfully, please contact
Mr. Mirnes Redzic
Best regards
ANDRITZ AG
, fl. ";*," Qr/;i G*, !c. Ppn'(,2a4
copy to AIA Area Office of OneClS America lnsurance Company ONE/TV/BV Technische
lnspektions GmbH Germany
ANDRITZ AG Legal form: Corporation Bank account:

Stattegger Skasse I I Company seat: Graz, Court of registry: UniCredit Bank Austria AG
8045 Graz, Austria Landes- und Handelsgericht Graz Bank code: 12000
Phone: +43.316 6902-0 Company reg. no.: FN 50935 f, Acc.no.: 0087 47164 00
Page
Fax: +43.316.6902-415 95 of005
DVR: 112
0008, ARA-Iicence-no.: 7485 IBAN: AT08 1100 0008 74716400
wvvw.andritz com VAT (UlD):4TU28609707 BIC (SWIFT): BKAUATWW
M
lnquiry for an interpretation to N8-61 '14.2, Edition 1998, Addenda 2000 and NCA'8322'
Edition 2010, Addenda 2011
Question:
ls it permissible to construct a pump under the responsibility of the N- cerlificate holder, to

fabricate at his location a subassembly and performing the pressure test, to ship his
subassembly to his subcontracted N-type cerlificate holder, who is fabricating the pump
casing, performing the pressure test on the pump casing, marking the pump casing with the
NPT designator, pedorming the shop assembly of the pump by mechanical means and to
perform the stamping with the N designator at subcontractors location?
The pressure test of the subassemblies replaces the component pressure test in accordance
to NCA-8322.The certification of the NVP-1 Data Reporl is performed by the N certificate
holder after the review of the Design Report by owner is available.
Reply:
Yes, provided all applicable requirements of NCA-8322 and N8-61 14.2 are complied with.

Stattegger Strasse I I Company seat: Graz, Court of registry: UnCredt Bank Austria AG
Phone: +43.316 6902-0 Company reg. no.: FN 50935 f, Acc.no.:0087 4716400
Page
Fax: +43.31 6.6902-41 5 96 of005
DVR: 112
0008, ARA-Iicence-no.: 7485 IBAN: AT08 ll00 0008 74716400
www.andritz.com VAT (UlD):ATU28609707 BIC (SWf FT): BKAUATWW
ffi
Attachment to application to Committee on Gonstruction of Nuclear Facility
Gomponents
Background
Our company, Andritz AG, is holding ASME Certificates to construct Nuclear Pumps since
2001.
We have constructed since 1975 approximately 30 welded Nuclear pumps according to
ASME Code Section lll and other nuclear Codes.
Since 1975 we did not have any failure with our design in service
Statement of need
Our global trade requires subcontracting to other N-type certificate holders.
We have therefore a cooperation with an N{ype certificate holder who is fabricating the
cladded pump casing, performing the pressure test on the pump casing and the shop
assembly of the pump by mechanical means on our behalf.
We are responsible for the design of the pump, for the stamping with the
N designator and the certification of the NPV-1 Data Report.
But we are also fabricating and pressure testing under our own N- certificate a part of the
pump as a subassembly which is shipped to the location of the subcontracted N-type
certificate holder.
Since we are implementing such an order in a very tight schedule we are requesting the
Committee for a quick processing of this inquiry.
lnquiry
see enclosure

Stattegger Strasse 1 I Company seat: Graz, Court of registry: UniCredit Bank Austria AG
Phone: +43.316.6902-0 Company reg. no : FN 50935 f, Acc.no.: 0087 47164 O0
Page
Fax: +43.316.6902-415 97DVR:
of 005
1120008, ARA-licence-no : 7485 IBAN: AT08 1100 0008 74716400
www.andritz.com VAT (UlD):ATU28609707 BIC (SWIFT): BKAUATWW
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

04/30/13 LarochelleW 04/30/13
1. Subject *
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, NCA-3861, 2010 Edition 2011 Addenda

Question: Is it permissible for the material organization to transcribe the results of test performed by their approved suppliers in the
Certified Material Test Report?
Proposed Reply: Yes. The material organization may transcribe the results of test performed by their approved suppliers to their
Certified Material Test Report.
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, NCA-3861, 2010 Edition 2011 Addenda
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 98 of 112
Inquiry 13-801
Page 99 of 112
Inquiry 13-801
Page 100 of 112

Page 101 of 112
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

04/30/13
1. Subject *
ASME B&PVC, Section III, Division 1, NE-2431.1; General Test Requirements (for Weld Metal Tests).

Question (1):
Shall the requirement of The base material shall conform with the requirements of Section IX,
QW-403.1 or Section IX, QW-403.4, as applicable in NE-2431.1(b) be applied to the weld metal
except ESW such as GMAW or GTAW?
Proposed Reply (1):

No. QW-403.1 and QW-403.4 of Section IX are not listed for at least GMAW (see QW-255) and
GTAW (see QW-256). They are listed for ESW, EGW, Resistance Welding, and LBW only.
3. Explanation *
This propsoal will interpret ASME B&PVC, Section III, Division 1, NE-2431.1;
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 102 of 112
Inquiry 13-803
ECS-PEG-003-001 Rev.0 ( 1 / 3 )
IHI Corporation
1, Shin-Nakahara-cho, Isogo-Ku, Yokohama 235-8501, JAPAN
File No. : ECS-PEG-003-001 Rev.0
TO: From: Shinya Masuda

Ms. Allyson Byk Production Engineering Group,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers Nuclear & Chemical Components Works
Two Park Avenue IHI Corporation
New York, NY 10016 TEL: +81-45-759-2749
e-mail: shinya_masuda@ihi.co.jp
April. 26, 2013
Subject: Request for ASME Code Section III Interpretation Regarding Base Material for Weld Metal Test
to be Applied to Containment Vessel.
References:
(1) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Subsection NE (2001 Edition and 2002
Addenda)
(2) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX (2010 Edition and 2011 Addenda)
Dear Sir or Madam,
Please see below a request for a Code Interpretation. Please forward to the appropriate ASME B&PV
Code Section III Committees for your review and reply. Your prompt review and reply of the matter is
greatly appreciated. The background information for this matter is shown in Appendix-A.
Requested Code Interpretation:

Subject:
ASME B&PVC, Section III, Division 1, NE-2431.1; General Test Requirements (for Weld Metal Tests).
Question (1):
Shall the requirement of The base material shall conform with the requirements of Section IX,
QW-403.1 or Section IX, QW-403.4, as applicable in NE-2431.1(b) be applied to the weld metal
except ESW such as GMAW or GTAW?
Proposed Reply (1):

No. QW-403.1 and QW-403.4 of Section IX are not listed for at least GMAW (see QW-255) and
GTAW (see QW-256). They are listed for ESW, EGW, Resistance Welding, and LBW only.
Page 103 of 112

ECS-PEG-003-001 Rev.0 ( 2 / 3 )
Your prompt consideration and reply of this matter is highly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Shinya Masuda
Production Engineering Group
Nuclear & Chemical Components Works
IHI Corporation
1, Shin-Nakahara-Cho, Isogo-Ku, Yokohama, JAPAN 235-8501
Tel: +81-45-759-2749
Fax: +81-45-759-2784
e-mail: shinya_masuda@ihi.co.jp
Page 104 of 112

ECS-PEG-003-001 Rev.0 ( 3 / 3 )
Appendix-A: Background Information about the Inquiry
IHI considers that

For example, regarding welding material for GMAW conforming to SFA-5.28 ER80S-G, base metal of weld
metal test may be A 516 Grade 70 with buttering by the same welding material as that to be used for the test, as
shown below. (They are pieces of the contents in Section II, part C, SFA-5.28.)
Base metal for weld metal test of GMAW does not need to be the same P-Number, Type, or Grade
as that to be used for actual production welding in accordance with QW-403.1 and QW-403.4 of
Section IX because these are not listed for GMAW (see QW-255).
Page 105 of 112

Page 106 of 112
Inquiry 13-845
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

None

05/07/13
1. Subject *
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Code Case N-759, Alternative Rules for Determining Allowable External Pressure and
Compressive Stresses for Cylinders, Cones, Spheres, and Formed Heads Section Ill, Division 1

Question 1: For cylindrical shell, is it applied that the allowable stress for test condition shall be 135% of the value determined by
those requirements in Section 2.0 or 3.0 of the Code Case?
Proposed Reply (1): Yes.
3. Explanation *
This proposal shall interpret BPVC N-759.
Background: According to "Section 2.2, stress reduction factors of N-759" prescribes those allowable stresses for service loadings
including Service Level A, B, and C but the acceptance criteria for Test Condition is not mentioned in the Code Case. However, Per
NB-3226(c), the external pressure for Test Condition shall not exceed 135% of the value determined by the rules of NB-3133.
None
C. File Attachments
1. Proposal File


None
Page 107 of 112
2013-05- 02 17:48/ 8! Alliol)ACPJHII/~ ACPI!l!O:DI/oksuk. kim/ ~ ~II:
Doosan Heavy Industries

& Construction
T
F
(Tel : 82-55-278-5725)
ASME Section Ill Secretary Ref : DS_ASME_1302

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee May 2, 2013
Three Park Avenue Page 1 of 2
New York, NY 10016-5990
Email : byka@asme.org
Subject : Request for Code Interpretation Regarding Alternative rules for determining
allowable external pressure and compressive stresses
Reference:
(1) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Code Case N-759-0, Alternative
Rules for Determining Allowable External Pressure and Compressive
Stresses for Cylinders, Cones, Spheres, and Formed Heads Section Ill ,
Division 1
Dear Ms. Byk,
Following is a request for interpretation of ASME Code Case N-759-0 regarding the
alternative rules for determining allowable external pressure and compressive stresses.
Please forward to the proper ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section Ill
Committee. Your prompt response of this matter is greatly appreciated.
Purpose : Code Interpretation
Background 1:
According to "Section 2.2, stress reduction factors of N-759" prescribes those allowable
stresses for service loadings including Service Level A, B, and C but the acceptance
criteria for Test Condition is not mentioned in the Code Case. However, Per NB-3226(c),
the external pressure for Test Condition shall not exceed 135% of the value determined
by the rules of NB-3133.
Page 108 of 112

Copyright by DOOSAN Heavy Industries and Construction. Co .. Ltd. !F&g;g gj All Rights Reserved.
2013-05-02 17:48/l!! Xf~)RC PJH li.'l!l RCPI!I!~IIf /oksuk. k im/~ J;l~
Doosan Heavy Industries

& Construction
ASME Section Ill Secretary Ref : DS- ASME- 1302

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee May 2, 2013
Three Park Avenue Page 2 of 2
New York, NY 10016-5990
Email : byka@asme.org
Inquiry #1: For cylindrical shell, is it applied that the allowable stress for test condition
shall be 135% of the value determined by those requirements in Section 2.0 or 3.0 of the
Code Case?
Proposed Reply: Yes
Background 2:
According to "Section 2, general design information of N-759", the allowable stress

equations apply directly to shells fabricated from carbon and low alloy steel materials.
These equations can also be applied to other materials for which a chart or table is
provided in Subpart 3 of Section II, Part D. The method for calculating the allowable
stresses for shells constructed from these materials in determined by the procedure in
Section 2 in N-759.
Inquiry #2: Shall we follow Section 2 for cylindrical shell with Alloy 690 (Ni-Cr-Fe)
included in external pressure chart in Subpart 3 of Section II, Part D?
Proposed Reply: Yes
Sincerely yours,
Oak-sug Kim , Staff R&PD Con sultant

RCP R&D Team
DOOSAN
Page 109 of 112

Copyright by DOOSAN Heavy Industries and Construction . Co .. Ltd. ~6H5;ggj All Righ ts Reserved .
Inquiry 13-864
C&S Connect

What's Different?
* Required field

BPV SC-III SGGR

05/09/13 BykA 05/09/13
1. Subject *
BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3530 and NCA-3620(q)

Question 1: May an N Certificate Holder assume design responsibility for an appurtenance in accordance with NCA-3530?
Proposed Reply (1) : Yes
Question (2): In accordance with NCA-3530 may an N Certificate Holder provide the Design Report for an appurtenance required by N
CA-3 620( q)?
Proposed Reply (2): Yes
Question (3): When the N Certificate Holder subcontracts fabrication to an NPT Certificate Holder and provides the Design Report for
an appurtenance required by NCA-3620(q), does completion of information on the N-2 for "Certification of Design' mean that the NPT
Certificate Holder assumes design responsibility?
Proposed Reply (3): No
Question 4: If the answer to question 2 is yes, may the NPT Certificate Holder record on the N-2 Data Report "'Design Certification"
that that theN Certificate Holder assumes responsibility for the appurtenance Data Report required by NCA-3620( q)?
Question (5): If the answer to question 4 is No, is the N-Certificate Holder required to complete an additional N-2
Data Report for "Certification of Design"?
3. Explanation *
This proposal will interpret BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3530 and NCA-3620(q)
Page 110 of 112
Page 111 of 112
Page 112 of 112

39147

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

39147

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Two Pa rk Av en u e tel 1.212.591.

Ne w Yo rk, NY fax 1.212.591.8501

Tracking PTM Subject Page

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1: Material

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, Appendix I, Fig. I-9.1

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NF 3322.8(c)(4)(a)

Status: It was advised that additional information should be

ASME BPVC Section III, NE-6225 (2001 Code Edition through

ASME BPVC Section III, NCA-3251

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-3226

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-2223.3

ASME Section III Div.1, 2011 Addenda and earlier

ASME BPVC Section III, Div.2, Table CC-4552-2, EXEMPTIONS

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NB-6114.3

ASME BPVC Section III, Division 1, NCA-3862.1(b) Furnishing of

ASME BPVC Section III NCA-3252(c)

ASME BPVC Section III NB-5410(b) and NCA-3252(c)

ASME BPVC Section III Table NB-3681(a)-1

ASME BPVC Section III NC-3650

ASME Section Ill, Division I, NB/NC/ND/NE/NF/NG/NH-2121

Section III Division 1, NA/NCA 1971 Edition to 2007 Edition,

New! Updates to C&S Connect Officer Postings Feature (Effective immediately)

View Interpretations Record# 12-732

Committees Involved in This Record

8. Record Established: 9. Last Updated By: 10. Last Updated On:

2. Proposed Question(s) and Reply(ies)

Proposed reply 1: Yes.

Proposed reply 2: Yes.

2. Background Material File

3. Committee Correspondence File

View/Manage File Attachments

D. Project Administrative Manager

F. Project Technical Manager

2. Project Manager Notes

G. Sub-Tier Committee Level

2. Project Team Name 3. Project Team Members

4. Subcommittee Item History

H. Additional Committee information

Pending Committees Committees Responded

5. Type (Nuclear Only)

6.Text of Subordinate Group Negatives 7.Subordinate Group Action Date

I. Additional Standards Committee information

4. Standards Committee Description 2 5. Standards Committee Action 2 6. Committee Action Date 2

Editor's Fields Last Updated By:

Comments & Negatives Posted for Ballot#: 13-462

DeublerR (Approved) Response:

MatthewsD (Approved) Response:

MatthewsD (Follow-Up Response)

2. Standards Committee Ballot History

No ANSI information is available at this time

New! Updates to C&S Connect Officer Postings Feature (Effective immediately)

View Component Record# 12-896

Committees Involved in This Record

8. Record Established: 9. Last Updated By: 10. Last Updated On:

Part 1: The intent inquiry with proposed reply.

Part 1: The intent inquiry with proposed reply.

The proposal file consists of two parts:

Part 1: The intent inquiry with proposed reply.

The proposal file consists of two parts:

Part 1: The intent inquiry with proposed reply.

2. Background Material File

3. Committee Correspondence File

View/Manage File Attachments

D. Project Administrative Manager