You are on page 1of 37

ASME_Ch26_p323-360.

qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 323

CHAPTER

26
OVERVIEW OF SECTION XI
STIPULATIONS
Owen Hedden

26.1 INTRODUCTION systems of nuclear power plants would be needed. The regulatory
division of the AEC began to develop criteria to address this con-
This chapter provides a chronological overview of the develop- cern, and in late 1967 a joint AEC–industry Code development
ment of Section XI, “The Rules for Inservice Inspection of program began under the auspices of the American National
Nuclear Power Plant Components,” from its 1968 inception to the Standards Institute (ANSI) N-45 Committee. A draft Code was
1998 edition. It traces the development, edition-by-edition, of published by the ASME in October 1968, the joint committee was
important Code elements including the philosophy behind many accepted in 1971 as a Subgroup of the Subcommittee on Nuclear
of the revisions. Emphasis is placed on the 1989 through 1998 Power (Section III) of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
editions because they apply to a majority of nuclear plants in the Committee, and Section XI of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
United States and in other countries. Through an extensive tabula- was published in 1970.
tion of Code Interpretations, this chapter also attempts to give the Section XI, comprising only 24 pages in 1970, is now over 700
Code user some insights into clarification of many Section XI pages long. While it originally covered only light–water reactor
requirements. Further insight into the philosophy and technical Class 1 components and piping, it now includes Class 2 and Class 3
basis behind Section XI may be gained from review of papers systems, metal and concrete containment, and liquid metal–cooled
cited in the Bibliography of this chapter. reactor plants. Rules have also been developed for gas-cooled and
Subsequent chapters of this book address the major areas of low-pressure heavy-water reactor plants, but work on them has
Section XI, including inservice inspection (ISI) examination and test been suspended since Code users are no longer interested in these
programs, repairs and replacements, acceptance and evaluation crite- types of plants.
ria, containment programs, and fatigue crack growth. Nondestructive
examination is addressed in this chapter as its requirements evolve. 26.1.2 Inservice Inspection Philosophy
The Second Edition introduces changes and updates in several The following paragraph, which appears in the Foreword to the
sections, and adds new material in: “Review and Comment” editions of Divisions 2 and 3, 1978, pre-
sents a more general view than that given in 1970 for Division 1.
26.2.7 1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda only
26.2.8 2001 Edition through its 2003 Addenda The object of inservice inspection of components in nuclear
26.2.9 Current Developments power plants is to provide a continuing assurance that they are
26.3 Carryover Issues safe. To provide this assurance for those components that are
26.5.6 Acceptance Standards for Steam Generator Tubing subject to the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure
26.9 Appendix A: Code Cases Vessel Code, a set of rules has been formulated to provide assur-
26.10 Appendix B: Interpretations ance that the functional requirements of the components are
available when required. The rules have been arranged to pro-
26.1.1 Origin vide appropriate levels of assurance according to the importance
The original concept used by nuclear power plant designers of the component in its relationship to plant safety. The classifi-
was that the higher standards adopted for design and fabrication cations that are established during design and manufacturing
would allow the passive components (i.e., vessels, heat exchang- have been adopted to provide the levels of importance for the
ers, and piping) to operate for their intended design life without components. The types of components typically found in the
inordinate attention. While it was recognized that the maintenance various classifications have then been identified and rules for-
or replacement of active components (i.e., pumps, valves, control mulated for each type. For each type of component in each clas-
rod drives, and heaters) would be necessary, little attention was sification, the functions have been considered and methods of
given to provisions for inspection access, and the need for inser- inspecting, testing, or monitoring each component is specified.
vice inspection was not considered. However, by 1966 the Atomic These rules include methods of determining the limits of accep-
Energy Commission (the AEC; now called the Nuclear Regulatory tance of the results. Should it be necessary to take corrective
Commission, or NRC) recognized that a planned program of peri- action to repair various components, rules have been provided
odic inspections of the pressure-containing components and piping to establish acceptable methods of repair or replacement.

ASME_Ch26_p323-360.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 324

324 • Chapter 26

The basis on which the rules were developed is the assumption of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, as well as references to
that a component, as constructed, is acceptable; however, to estab- other standards and specifications.
lish a record of its condition for later comparison, a preopera- Each division also contains Mandatory and Nonmandatory
tional (baseline) examination is required. Subsequent examina- Appendices. Each Mandatory Appendix contains requirements
tions are compared to this preoperational examination to and is designated by a Roman numeral, whereas a Nonmandatory
determine if there has been a change. Appendix provides information or guidance for the use of Section XI
The philosophy includes the consideration that similar compo- and is designated by a capital letter.
nents, which are subjected to essentially identical service condi-
tions, will behave in a similar manner. For this reason, representa- 26.1.4 Terminology
tive sampling, which is rotated through the similar components, is One of the keys to understanding the ASME Code is to
used to ensure that all components are safe. The percentage of understand that many common terms have specific defined
similar components or portions of components examined and the meanings unique to the Code. The engineer attempting to use
frequency of examination are adjusted in accordance with the the Code for the first time must learn a new language. Section XI
classification established by the Owner. lists many such terms in its Glossary, Article IWA-9000. For
The purpose of the rules is to provide a uniform standard to instance:
which all nuclear power plants are subjected. By providing such a
standard, important areas are not overlooked and unimportant Owner—the organization legally responsible for the opera-
areas are not given unnecessary attention. tion, maintenance, safety, and power generation of a nuclear
power plant.
26.1.3 Layout of Section XI
Even though the arrangement of each Section of the ASME This was revised in the 1995 Addenda:
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code uses the same nomenclature,
such as in the terms Division and Article, the organization of each Owner—the organization legally responsible for the construc-
Section is unique. To use a Section efficiently, it helps for one to tion and/or operation of a nuclear facility including but not
know its arrangement. The reader is urged to review ORGANI- limited to one who has applied for, or who has been granted,
ZATION OF SECTION XI, in the Section XI front matter. It a construction permit or operating license by the regulatory
includes, in addition to the layout shown below, useful informa- authority having lawful jurisdiction.
tion regarding other documents referenced in the Code, such as
American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT) SNT-TC- Others:
1A, and the Code of Federal Regulations. Section XI follows the
format of Section III, with the content of Subsections and Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector—a person who is
Articles following Section III as closely as was practical. While employed and has been qualified by an Authorized Inspection
Section XI has Divisions 1, 2, and 3 for light-water–cooled, gas- Agency to verify that examinations, tests, and repair/replace-
cooled, and liquid metal–cooled reactor systems, only Division 1, ment activities (that do not include welding or brazing) are
which comprises the following subsections, is now in general use. performed in accordance with the rules and requirements of
this Section.
IWA, General Requirements Inspector—an Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector, except
IWB, Class 1 Components for those instances where so designated as an Authorized
IWC, Class 2 Components Nuclear Inspector.
IWD, Class 3 Components Inspection—verification of the performance of examinations
IWE, Class MC and CC Components and tests by an Inspector.
IWF, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Component Supports
IWG, Core Internal Structures Enforcement authority and regulatory authority are also defined
IWL, Class CC Concrete Components terms. In brief, enforcement refers to State and regulatory refers
IWP, Pumps to Federal.
IWV, Valves Three terms that relate to components are:
Each of these subsections is divided into the following articles, item—a material, part, appurtenance, piping subassembly,
all of which are numbered in units of 1000: component, or component support.
1000, Scope and Responsibility component—an item in a nuclear power plant such as a ves-
2000, Examination and Inspection sel, pump, valve, or piping system.
3000, Acceptance Standards construction—an all-inclusive term comprising materials,
4000, Repair Procedures design, fabrication, examination, testing, inspection, and certi-
5000, System Pressure Tests fication required in the manufacture and installation of items.
6000, Records and Reports
7000, Replacements (Note: This title is now part of 4000.) Nondestructive examination (NDE) brings in the largest set of
terms that may be confusing at first. All have specific meanings
Articles are further divided into subarticles, numbered in in the context of ASME’s NDE requirements. Examination is
units of 100; subsubarticles, numbered in units of 10; and para- generally the activity to determine nondestructively the condition/
graphs. The numbering system is described in greater detail in integrity of the pressure-retaining boundary. Testing is the activity
Section XI’s front matter, Organization of Section XI. It also to determine by application of internal pressure the condition/
describes the convention used for references to other sections integrity of the pressure-retaining boundary.

ASME_Ch26_p323-360.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 325

COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 325

Other NDE-related terms in the Glossary are: 26.2 DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPE AND
CONTENT OF SECTION XI
imperfection—a condition of being imperfect; a departure of
a quality characteristic from its intended condition. 26.2.1 1970 Edition and Addenda: Inservice
discontinuity—a lack of continuity or cohesion; an inter- Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Coolant
ruption in the normal physical structure of material or a Systems
component. Since its beginning, Section XI has called for inspections of
indication—the response or evidence from the application of weld areas of vessels and other pressure-containing nuclear sys-
a nondestructive examination. tem components. Selection was directed toward areas known to
flaw—an imperfection or unintentional discontinuity that is have high service factors, and also toward other areas, to provide
detectable by a nondestructive examination. a representative sampling for general overall condition. While
defect—a flaw (imperfection or unintentional discontinuity) weld areas were specified, it was recognized that the volumetric
of such size, shape, orientation, location, or properties as to examination of the weld and its adjacent base material would
be rejectable. entail a significant amount of base metal examination.
The plant systems subject to examination were the following:
These last definitions have been provided with unofficially
circulated explanations: (a) the reactor coolant system;
(b) portions of the associated auxiliary systems connected to
Imperfection: No inherent or implied association with lack of the reactor coolant system; and
conformance with specification requirements or with lack of (c) portions of emergency core–cooling systems connected to
fitness for purpose, i.e., imperfection may or may not be the reactor coolant system.
rejectable.
Discontinuity: No inherent or implied association with lack Excluded from the examination were those components and
of conformance with specification requirements or with lack piping within the aforementioned boundaries of which failure was
of fitness for purpose, i.e., discontinuities may or may not within the capability of normal makeup systems.
be rejectable. An unintentional discontinuity is also an A 10 yr. inspection cycle (the interval) was chosen based on
imperfection. Cracks, inclusions, and porosity are examples historical failure rate data for non–nuclear steam power and petro-
of unintentional discontinuities which are also imperfec- chemical plant systems. Evaluation of inspection results and result-
tions. Intentional discontinuities may be present in some ing repairs were in accordance with component Construction Codes.
material or products because of intentional changes in con- Construction Code rules, which had been directed toward the
figuration; these are not imperfections and are not expected activities of the manufacturers of Code items, were soon found to
to be so evaluated. be not always appropriate for installed components. (See Table 26.1
Indication: When the nature or magnitude of the indication for additional differences between Sections III and XI.) The fact
suggests that the cause is an imperfection or discontinuity, that the utility or plant Owner is seldom an ASME Certificate
evaluation is required. Holder (also called a Code Stampholder) is confusing to anybody
Flaw: No inherent or implied association with lack of confor- accustomed to using the Code, because the state enforcement
mance with specification requirements or lack of fitness for authority and the Nuclear Inspector are not quite in their usual
purpose, i.e., a flaw may or may not be rejectable. Defect: roles. Some of the usual Code rules do not apply; in fact, Section XI
Always rejectable, either for: itself does not state when compliance to an edition or addenda
becomes mandatory. This date is instead established by the NRC
(a) lack of conformance to specification requirements in the provisions of Part 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations:
(b) potential lack of fitness for purpose, or 10CFR50.55a. Another related anomaly is that the Owner is
(c) both not required to conduct repairs using a Quality Assurance (QA)
A defect (a rejectable flaw) is by definition a condition that
must be removed or corrected.
Additional insight into Code terminology can be gained from
review of usage in ORGANIZATION OF SECTION XI, in the
Code front matter.
The Glossary in Code Section V is another source of defini-
tions of terms useful to users of Section XI. Quoting from a list of
Code terms:
The following is a list of nondestructive examination methods
and respective abbreviations used within the scope of Section V:
RT— Radiography
UT— Ultrasonics
MT— Magnetic Particle
PT— Liquid Penetrant
VT— Visual
LT— Leak Testing
ET— Electromagnetic (Eddy Current)
AE— Acoustic Emission

” and includes the following: Construction Code/Section III on the type of weld examination by not imposing an examination method more severe than the (1) inservice testing of pumps. is always initial plan to provide inservice inspection of all Section III com- required to have a QA program accepted by the NRC. Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants. which was ultrasonic testing (UT). In 1989. UT was The Class 3 systems function primarily to transport cooling not generally used as a Code examination method. and ASME O&M S/G— Except for item (1). two documents: ASME O&M Code. and snubbers. for not been provided. it was recognized that the proper functioning of pumps. insufficient space around component examination areas and except for the emergency core–cooling and critical heat removal where operation of remotely operated equipment is impractical. and snubbers. a volumetric examination (2) inservice testing of valves. Standards Committee independent of the Boiler and Pressure (8) repair procedures.2 1974 Edition and Addenda sists of visual examinations for evidence of leakage. Construction Code/Section III—that is. The plant operator was permitted to defer examination of such However. However. Valve tests included periodic exer- Additions and revisions comprise the following elements. everything of size NPS 4 and smaller was exempted and. the listed elements are unique to Section XI Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear and replace Construction Code requirements with requirements Power Plants. The title of the book was changed from interval. Test measurements included speed. A related problem was that the Construction were statically pressurized passive safety injection systems. It was all of these systems were exempted from examination program.1 Examination of Section III Class 2 and 3 Systems (4) inservice testing of pressure-relief devices. Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Coolant Systems to Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components. where Section III imposed a surface examination. temperature of 200⬚F or less. (3) preservice and inservice examination and testing of dynamic restraints (snubbers).2. and Vessel Committee. valves. For example. evident that the more practical method for inservice examination they were not exempted from the pressure test program. The systems are techniques needed to be developed. the approach to examination of Class 2 systems One of the initial problems was that despite the urgent need for was complicated by several considerations. The O&M Code is published in one section titled appropriate for operating plants.2.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 326 326 • Chapter 26 program accepted by the ASME.2 Functional Testing of Pumps. (4) acceptance–rejection levels. The Subcommittee assumed responsibility acceptance of flaws. which could be conducted where meant that they were all regularly subjected to examination for there was only access to one surface and which would not be leakage while under pressure. Also exempted ments from the NRC. and (1) examination of Section III Class 2 and 3 systems. affected by radioactivity from the component. Inservice testing rules are now published in (9) component replacement.2. acceptance standards appropriate for essential for safety and therefore should be included in the inspec- ultrasonic examination. valves. measurements.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. permitting mainte- nance without interrupting the system function. The Owner.) systems. and snubbers became the responsibility of the Operation and (6) analytical evaluation of flaws. Class 2 access to radioactive areas of the plant to perform examinations. and pipe snubbers in nuclear power plant systems was ments were NDE methods. and repair methods that had not been consid. and Snubbers from the plants indicated problems with the application of While the primary concern of all sections of the ASME Boiler and Construction Code requirements. The program con- 26. valves. Pump testing emphasized of which will be described in the forthcoming paragraphs: detection of changes in hydraulic and mechanical characteristics. criteria were established for acceptable (2) functional testing of pumps. a new ASME Nuclear Codes and (7) documentation: records and reports. differential pressure. Among the require. areas still exist where there is instance. valves. The Subcommittee responded to Pressure Vessel Code is integrity of the pressure-retaining bound- the power plant Owner’s or operator’s needs by providing new ary. those operating at a pressure of 275 psig or less. Rules for Inservice Testing of Light-Water Reactor Power examination program was the avoidance of inconsistency with Plants. there appeared to be a large range in relative importance areas until the end of the 10 yr. tems than in other systems. the rules for functional testing of pumps. . The philosophy behind of Class 2 systems. However. and access for subsequent examinations had coolant system. or corrosion. therefore did not warrant as thorough an examination program. ranges. however. Valves. were also exempted. structural By 1974. systems were not considered as important as Class 1 systems and remotely operated NDE equipment had not yet been developed. and improved water to and from the Class 1 and 2 systems. Another consideration in the “IST. vibration amplitude. inspection Section III Subcommittee. generally designed to provide redundancy. but there was a high degree of system Essentially all the plants that exist today had been ordered and redundancy and all systems could be isolated from the primary designed by 1977. ponents.2. 26. and Examination of Section III Class 2 and 3 systems was part of the (5) checking of the valve condition monitoring program. (In many plants. (5) development of acceptance standards for cracklike flaws. While Code method of volumetric examination was radiography. requirements appropriate for operating plants. each cising and leak-rate measurements. “alert ranges. The integrity of emergency core cooling and this deferral was that techniques could be developed or the Code shutdown systems was obviously more important in Class 2 sys- could be changed at that time. the Section XI Subcommittee (Subcommittee on distress. and at a The plant operators must obtain relief from those Code require. Initial feedback 26. for the development of requirements for functional testing of ered appropriate for new construction. interval.” and “action-required” ranges for each of the (3) need for ultrasonic examination. pumps. Visual examinations are conducted during Nuclear Inservice Inspection) had been separated from the pressure tests after shutdown three times per 10 yr. but this task did not prove easy. Several classes of exemptions were developed.2. Maintenance Committee. analytical evaluation techniques for tion of operating plants.

teams in such factors as detection. in (3) Requiring multiple scans. and equipment. additional factor is the difference in ultrasonic reflectivity ing of power-operated relief valve assemblies.3 Need for Ultrasonic (UT) Examination A major experience and judgment of the individual test operator for determin- design emphasis of Section III was protection from fatigue failure. In addition. The blocks were significantly larger than entation would also be necessary. of the problems of UT examination accuracy and reproducibility raphy (RT) of all critical welds in new construction.2. thick. The members could not find any evidence of most effective for volumetric (i. been usual. . These needs were also consistent with the fracture (5) Requiring exacting calibration. clusions of the round-robin tests was that the ASME Code UT requirements referenced in Section III were too dependent on the 26. and the transfer of attenuation corrections was like) flaws of primary concern. and reflectors missed.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 327 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 327 The O&M S/G comprises the following Standards: There are a number of other factors that made evaluation of ultrasonic reflectors difficult for UT operators. (2) requirements for thermal expansion testing of piping sys. A contemporary report documented differ- (7) inservice performance testing of heat exchangers. and Section III design requirements (and fusion). tor’s woes was reproducibility. in 1975. flaws above the minimum acceptable sizes and that would also (4) Defining calibration blocks to duplicate vessel materials accurately define their dimensions. showed surprisingly broad variations between different “expert” The Subcommittee selected ultrasonics (UT) as the method of non. cause unanticipated beam diver- (3) testing of electric motor operators on valves. for piping. niques. One of the con- (4) vibration monitoring of rotating equipment. The beam directiv- (1) requirements for performance testing of closed-cooling ity pattern (beam spread) is generally greater than the operator water systems. Examine by straight beam and by 1973. slag and porosity) flaws. but the and led to the development of Appendix I.. In addition. measurements on the block were also more extensive than had ographic results of the Construction Code. tems. assumes. can be performed from one surface. Adjacent base material was included in the exami- able for both detecting and sizing many types of service-induced nation volume. slag and lack of faces is necessary for RT. and construction. linear reflector as it is traversed by the beam. would be performed by different operators who often were from dif- (3) vibration testing and assessment of heat exchangers. correlation is poor.e. of operation. The approach taken was Subcommittee knew UT to be superior to RT for detection of to limit the responsibility of operator by rigidly defining the para- fatigue cracks and to be more appropriate for use in the radiation meters of the UT procedure. and culminat. continuities. Defining true location and ori. false calls. he or she needed only to define the reflector’s designers) did not provide that access for installed components. which indicated the limit that the mem- Vessel Research Council programs on NDE sensitivity and repro. The new problem that inservice inspection added to the UT opera- (1) inservice monitoring of core-barrel axial preload in pressur.e. UT. the technique the standard Code blocks to reduce the effect of sidewall needed to allow accurate measurements of changes in reflectors reflections and to provide full-beam paths. such as cladding. access to both sur. Other contemporary round- It follows that the Subcommittee was concerned primarily with robin tests on test blocks containing intentionally flawed welds detection of fatigue cracks that initiated during plant operation. with calibration checks every 4 hr. The generic Code methodology was shown to be unreli. Doing so results in nine scans for a typical vessel were needed that would possess sensitivity sufficient to detect all main seam and five scans for the adjacent base material. examination. Most important. instead. but is experimental verification of any of the recommended transfer ineffective for cracks not oriented parallel to the X-ray beam.2. ences often 20 dB (or 10 times) less from real reflectors versus The O&M S/G also comprises the following Guides: similarly sized machined disk reflectors. These examinations. largely on detection of differences from previous examinations. both sides (from one surface) and parallel to the weld in both The Subcommittee members recognized that new requirements directions. (1) Limiting the scope of the rules to butt welds in ferritic ves- 1 Inadequacy of the method was demonstrated first in the Pressure sels 22 –12 in. destructive examination for critical regions of the plant. life of the plant. Radiography is prohibited.. giving a substantial sample of base material flaws. Therefore. niques for improved UT reliability. dimensions and location within the weld thickness. performed over the 30–60 yr. accounts for the difficulty in detecting underclad cracking. This The sum of these problems made Subcommittee members aware method was inconsistent with Section III requirement for radiog. ing the nature and size of the reflectors.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. using round-robin tests on flawed weld specimens (2) Limiting scanning to straight-beam and half-node tech- [1]–[6]. one result of which is that a point reflector is plotted as a (2) requirements for preoperational and initial start-up vibra. tem—cables and all—with calibration upon any change and The first problem encountered in inservice inspection is the cor. longer asked to characterize the reflector (i. angle beams normal to the weld from ing with Appendices VII and VIII in 1989. They also had to over extended periods of time and with different UT personnel be retained on the vessel site. the Subcommittee began incorporating tech. the operator was no environment in operating plants. Calibration relation of UT results from preservice examination with the radi. techniques. and 60 deg. and ferent organizations that used different equipment. gence that creates difficulty with pitch-catch techniques and (4) loose part monitoring. An (5) requirements for periodic performance testing and monitor. between real flaws and the artificial calibration reflectors often (6) inservice testing and maintenance of diesel drives. however. Appendix III. Instrument calibration included each item in the sys- rently within the Subcommittee. For the planar (crack. ducibility. starting with Appendix I. Metallurgical dis- tion testing of piping systems. and used for flaw sizing. concern. 45 deg. for vessels. Each successive examination depended ized water reactors. bers felt could be supported by verified data. This requirement was a major mechanics–based acceptance standards being developed concur. The steps taken in the approach were as follows: Coincident with the recognition of the need for UT was the recognition of the inadequacy of the Section III UT requirements.

separation from the surface less than One aspect not reconsidered was the industry process for quali. which is or semicircle for a surface flaw). nation is determined to have been present in original construction (7) Providing a uniform system for identification of weld loca. It did not make amplitude correction (DAC). mechanics to a given flaw using flaw and material parameters and Also. Section XI permitted them to used the basic calibration blocks. icant shortcomings in each.” IWB-3600 contains provisions for acceptance of (a) Acceptable—components without flaws or with flaws meet.5 Development of Acceptance Standards for Crack- of calibrations.4 Acceptance–Rejection Levels In developing accep.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 328 328 • Chapter 26 (6) Defining reflector sizing technique. used search units of the same angles and frequencies.2. Appendix A applies linear-elastic fracture to have a safety margin adequate for continued service. or (d) Replacement— components with flaws that cannot be qual. The acceptance criteria of ified as conditionally acceptable and for which replacement IWB-3600 include a factor of 10 on minimum critical flaw size under appears to be more feasible than repair. fication of UT operators. when a flaw found by a Section XI exami- easily reveal any significant flaw. or incomplete inations covered the same examination surface (i. inside or out. adjustments for water and radiation environment. A manual UT examination indications. This technique remained It is important to note that. conservatism for Section XI’s basic allowable surface flaw. an ellipse or circle that contained the flaw indication (semiellipse The next real advance came in 1989 with Appendix VIII. Surface proximity of a buried discussed later in this chapter. cracklike flaws. to avoid conflicts with Section III requirements. but is acceptable under the accep- welds the same way. and location of recorded like Flaws Section III NDE acceptance standards do not permit indications for comparison with subsequent examinations. cracklike flaws originating with construction that had not been tions arose. acceptance were developed: flaws that exceed the sizes specified in the tables may be “condition- ally acceptable. penetration needed to be removed before a component could leave side). that indications of cracklike flaws. It was felt to be adequate in view of the Additional criteria were developed to address multiple flaws in restrictions in the preceding list regarding the way the examina. the Subcommittee recognized that the Section III tor of 10 on reference flaw dimensions was selected as a measure of new construction standards did not have to be the basis for evalu. lack of fusion.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. in the event of a conditionally controversial. various configurations. However. and a length 12 times thickness for ferritic steel components. Therefore. A fac- tance criteria. but demonstrated by analysis Analysis of Flaws. slag inclusions and porosity. such flaws by reference to a series of Appendices that provide ing the acceptance standards. advanced analytical evaluation methods covering both plant operat- (b) Conditionally acceptable— components with flaws exceed. and VIII required examination performed with mechanical equipment if both exam. is calculated to grow until the end of the component’s service life. Section XI dependence on UT rather than RT for examinations led to a quandary when UT revealed the presence of With the establishment of the new procedure. the flaw is not required to be enabled successive examinations to have a chance of using removed or repaired. a uniform system was prescribed that tance standards of Section XI. 1 which established a reference flaw having a depth of 4 thickness 1 26. Because no two NDE service organizations identified the original Construction Code. subject to similar degradation conditions.6 Analytical Evaluation of Flaws As noted previously. detected by Section III RT. The Subcommittee expanded its rules to provide a series of UT ing in the adoption of Appendix VII and also improved American acceptance standards (IWB-3500) appropriate for a variety of appli- Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT) personnel qualifica. tection against nonductile failure given in Appendix G of Section III. The primary basis was the provision for pro- tion processes.2. In addition. until the next inspection. Flaw characterization was based on Subsequent experience resulted in many minor adjustments. such as the meaning and use of the term equivalence. additional ques.2. the same reference points. typical vessel section. is determined. the acceptable flaw depth relates closely to It was also recognized that a few considered acceptable for new the 2% radiographic acceptability criterion of Section III. the examination must be extended to other areas three most common techniques then in use and found signif. Manual UT techniques and UT remain in place if they met the specified size criteria of IWB-3410.e. welds examined. normal operating conditions and a factor of 2 on minimum critical . half the flaw depth caused it to be considered a surface flaw. and the shop or be accepted for service. starting with Appendix A. Section XI was primarily For preservice examinations. cations and materials. for a contemporary authority had reviewed the accepted flaw. the examinations may be acceptable if they are equivalent to those to Subcommittee chose to develop rules for acceptance of “planar be employed for inservice examinations. ing the acceptable standards. The following four levels of 26. techniques using mechanical equipment may be determined as The Section XI “planar flaw” criterion provided a simplification equivalent by means of correlation derived by comparing the from the Construction Code criteria. components having flaws that can be removed with stress fields at the flaw location. III. construction could conceivably grow during service without affecting component service life. Through a cumula- (c) Repair— components with flaws that cannot be qualified as tive fatigue crack growth study. flaw was also considered. including (where appropriate) out repair by welding. result. tion was conducted. since it was also applied to response of actual component indications.2. Section XI states that shop and field concerned with identification of fatigue cracks..2. The ISI examination report requirements were also intended to provide a complete record 26. The members selected a variation One of the primary concerns in developing new standards was on the “6 dB drop” technique that used 50% of the distance. This was subsequently reconsidered.2.” This development was unique for the Boiler and is considered equivalent in technique and equipment to an UT Pressure Vessel Code because Sections I. It was determined that this cri. and is of the size and type that exceeds the acceptance standard of tion. In a ating the structural integrity at different stages of service lifetime. the maximum size to which the flaw conditionally acceptable and for which repair is feasible. sense in most cases to reject a flaw that was acceptable for new terion should accept everything accepted by Section III and construction. ing conditions and flaws in components.

” It addressed this subject early in 1971 Section XI. It should also be noted that only 47 nuclear plants have piping (5) acceptance standards for piping. plants presently in service had already been ordered. However. priate for components in service. schedules. titled “General Design Criteria permitting welding and weld examination in accordance with for Nuclear Power Plants.3. includes some systems designed to Section III. “neither required nor be designed to permit periodic inspection and testing of important prohibited. or on order.7 (7) development of examples of Appendix A analysis. already been issued construction permits.” the work without needing to obtain the services of an ASME While Section XI was being developed with this concern Certificate/ Code Stampholder. problem—to meet the “essentially 100%” criterion. there have have been concerned with the need for access for nondestructive been several additions related to steam generator tubing failures. Each of the aforementioned additions and revisions is described (b) Areas selected. material without postweld heat treatment by using “temper-bead” (a) Access. and filing requirements. In August 1974. 1978.2. (4) concentration of piping examinations to high-duty areas. Nuclear News reported a joint calls for a volumetric examination. under construction. these were procedures that tightness. and flaws to an acceptable size (IWB-4300). coolant piping systems designed to either ASME B31. Appendix A. Of those under construction or on order. and Class 2 and 3 systems are similar. Application of the ASME NA-Symbol Stamp in several Design Criteria. and 48 plants have reactor (6) examination of steam-generator tubing.8 Repair Procedures By 1974. instead of Section III. records.7 Documentation: Records and Reports Along with because many of the existing units lack sufficient access for any- the expanding and more explicit requirements for each aspect of thing like 100% coverage. and 26. The new units were all cancelled. The examination provisions of edition. These procedures first appeared in the Summer 1973 Addenda. the changes in this edition are more in the nature of Section XI could not be retroactively applied to plants that were refinements. regarding the need for access for examination. and weld repair to ferritic (c) ultrasonic scanning limitations and recording requirements. by February 7. did not address access for subsequent inspections. all the examination and testing must be based on com. In addition to statements in the Foreword to Section XI.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. a format for these ination philosophy.2. examinations—a need that has not been recognized in the criteria covering tube plugging and tube sleeving.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 329 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 329 flaw size for initiation of nonar-resting growth under postulated total of 218 nuclear power plants in the United States in operation. systems designed using Section III. the Foreword included the following explanation: 26. The numbers for (9) replacement items. ject of design and access provisions for inspection and testing was tate installation of a new (Section III-stamped) component by included in 10CFR50. requirements has substantiated that objective. reduction of (b) selection of areas to be examined.2. These additions and revisions include the following: not designed with the access necessary for performance of these examinations without an allowance for reduction of the examina- (1) increase of examination of reactor vessel welds from 5% tion volumes due to limited accessibility. each failure Obviously.3 1977 Edition and Addenda United States were designed before the development and imposi- In contrast to the totally new concepts introduced in the 1974 tion of accessibility requirements. included The areas most predominantly selected for examinations are because of NRC insistence. Thirteen more have a mix that (8) analytical evaluation.9 Component Replacement The Section XI rules facili.2. Again.1 Increase of Examination of Reactor Vessel Welds Areas Selected for Examination from 5% or 10% of Length to 100% This change. all of the or 10% of length to 100%. The Subcommittee leadership felt the increase to 100% nents.2. the sub- 26. 108 were completed. and 1971). The objective of Section XI’s requirements for extent of exami- nations is “to provide an assessment of general overall condition. which is contrary to Section XI’s fundamental exam- summary of the report and record requirements. Article IWA-6000 provides a ISI program.2. (3) repetitive piping examinations instead of random nonre- when the Section III Addenda adding the requirement for design peating piping examinations. Although the impression might be created that undue could be easily accomplished in new units by automated equipment attention is placed on the examination of welded joints. Actually. considering that plant conditions There are three related topics that need to be considered: severely restrict the methods and procedures that must be used. Twenty-five years of operating experience with these would not be acceptable for new construction but would be appro.” which recognizes the right of the Owner to perform areas and features to assess their structural and leaktight integrity. In the initial publications of Section XI (1970 in the following paragraphs. (a) access to the component for examination. the developers of Section XI techniques (IWB-4420 and IWB-4430). they have been left with an ongoing Section XI came the need for more explicit documentation.2.2. From its inception. each of which state “The systems shall (Section III assembly) is optional—that is. those new must be pointed out that such an examination of the welded units were never built. one should remem- ber that almost all of the nuclear power plants constructed in the 26. Class 1. the Subcommittee deter.1 or B31. The ASME B31 piping Codes (10) documentation. and 105 had (2) Appendix III for examination of welds in ferritic piping. used by the nuclear power plant designers. must be documented and justified every time that weld arises in the plete plans. and reports. Subsequently. The volumetric .” 26. had an unanticipated effect on the those associated with welds in pressure-containing compo- Owners. There is no inherent need to examine 100% of a specified weld mined that Section III repair rules needed to be supplemented with and adjacent base material to accomplish an assessment of gen- special procedures that recognized the restrictions imposed by eral overall condition nor to assess structural integrity and leak- operating plant conditions. it and design with inspection access provided. for inspection access was adopted in the Federal Regulation. emergency and faulted conditions. they included metal/flaw removal without weld repair.

such as intergranular stress–corrosion cracking Appendix III. . scanning. that had been constructed up to that time were far from ideal from cation of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) to rank the critical the standpoints of access. but they did not indicate appeared to be one of the ways to take operator judgment out of examination of 100% of the length of the selected welds was Appendix I vessel examinations. Recording examination data in accordance oped. The first step was to require a single- examination requirements that implemented Table IWB-2500-1 beam angle of 45 deg. The objective plished without increase in risk. indicated that these examinations thickness range of 0. as noted previously. developed for UT examination of piping intent to provide a sampling of all component systems and sizes. with other angles optional as needed to char- and Table IWC-2500-1 for vessel and piping examinations. including the weld heat-affected zone. but there is allow- on the same surface. . (c) Scanning Limitations. inner surface concavity. Subsequent greater in thickness. contains similar requirements in (IGSCC) and flow-assisted corrosion–erosion (FAC). obstructions. this fact shall be included in the report of the the most convenient locations to satisfy the requirements of examination. it was felt that Appendix III piping essential to assess general overall condition. and outer .5. (a) The adjacent base metal in the examination volume must be completely scanned by two angle beams. tion coverage. as Section XI White Paper titled Evaluation of Inservice Inspection good as that provided by the (new construction) radiograph. examining both base metal and welded joints are locations at I-5122 Scanning for Reflectors Oriented Parallel to the Weld the welded joints and these are singled out. and A similar situation exists for piping weld examination. Where component configuration precludes or limits In the case of the second category. and the appli. The locations. This fact was shown in the 1994 developed.) (1) The highest service factor related to operating conditions. T-441. practicable. undercut.5.1. . that of representative sam. Category B-J Pressure-Retaining Welds would be essential. consequently. In piping fab- (IWB-3500) shall be carried out from both sides of the weld rication.3. Two basic philosophies were involved in the selection of (Any combination of two angle beams will satisfy the areas for the examinations: requirement. represents the first was felt that a surface notch would most closely and practically sim- set of comprehensive requirements for UT examination of nuclear ulate the reflector of interest. an attempt was made to provide sufficient examinations examination. which sure-containing boundary. pumps. its application was limited to ferritic vessels 2. contains similar wording in T-441. I-5120 EXTENT OF SCANNING The development of new requirements for piping welds required I-5121 General consideration of several conditions that were not encountered in Wherever feasible the scanning of the examination volume vessel welds.4. with III-4520(e) and III-4520(g)(3) provides a record of examina- The need for “an assessment of general overall condition” remains. but it is not dependent on examining 100% of the length of 25% of At the time that Section XI NDE requirements were being the Class 1 circumferential welds. Although automated examination could be focused much more effectively. T-441. there is a very large tolerance was to obtain a record that could be compared with subsequent inherent in the requirement to examine 100% of the length of the examinations. Appendix I (1989 seams in piping. first appeared in the Winter 1975 Addenda.4. to assess the general overall condition. Based on the determina. welds. examinations would almost always have to be performed manually. the notes to Table 26.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. I-5200 STRAIGHT BEAM SCANNING and I-5213 Extent of Scanning (2) Representative sampling selected to provide an assess- Wherever possible the entire examination volume shall be ment of the general overall condition. scanned. required 25% of the Class 1 Category B-J piping welds. but need not be Representative Sampling completely scanned by both beams from both directions. . what had been scanned and what had been found. have devel. there is usually no inner surface access. and bolting in the pres- Edition) references Article 4 of Section V (1977 Edition). and surface contour. clearly exemplify the Appendix III of Section XI. Where configuration or adjacent parts of able mismatch. Requirements for Class 1.2 Appendix III for Examination of Welds in Piping IWC2500-1. members that inservice conditions for examination of the plants tion of failure mechanisms by operating experience. in the Summer 1975 Addenda. it Appendix I. it was recognized that a record of the examination. and also by emphasis on recording from examination of 25% to 10% of the welds can be accom. a much simpler calibra- vessels and includes the following: tion block than the one required for Appendix I was created. When Appendix I The sampling percentage—7. internal vessel supports. since it needed to cover a greater (inservice) volumetric examination is contained in the detailed ratio range of wall-thicknesses. specific conditions. Where T-441.5 in.2–6 in.2. and significantly less than the Class 1 requirement of 25%. Appendix III was developed for application operating experience and the development of risk-informed tech- to welds in both ferritic and austenitic piping systems. one of which was geometric reflectors. offset. for a wall- nology. For piping welds in Class 2 systems.2. Categories C-F-1 and C-F-2. It was also recognized by the Subcommittee in Piping. With attention concentrated on pipe surfaces. III-4430 and III-4450. weld but must be included in the examination report. Therefore. When a reduction ble and as far as practicable. acterize reflectors. Recognition of the realities of on-site One of its objectives was simplicity.5%—was chosen arbitrarily to be was issued. supporting Code Case N-560.. specific examinations have been developed to address them. .5. this fact shall be included in the report of the pling. . and valves. Examples in this cate- Appendix I clearly recognizes that 100% coverage is not gory are representative longitudinal and circumferential weld always possible and also that incomplete coverage is acceptable seams on the reactor vessel. a sample of 10% of the welds can be chosen to replace points were addressed in the requirements by terms such as feasi- the assessment of the current 25% required. for piping.qxd 5/22/09 2:44 PM Page 330 330 • Chapter 26 examination area includes a reasonable amount of adjacent base the component are such that scanning from both sides is not material.

was added to plant operator. growth had occurred. The contours permitted by the applicable component and fitting Codes standard for ferritic piping was still based on Appendix G and are not usually appropriate for effective UT of the weld joint.5% of the circumfer- weld crown will appear to be from the weld midthickness. as well as those developed for the other accep- cessful approach to these problems has been intensive specialized tance standards. and the recognition valve. Three sample problems joints was appropriate. at this time. a typical piping system are of the pipe-to-pipe variety.2. the Subcommittee’s next logical step was to have been developed and solutions have been prepared by each of select for examination those welds upon which the greatest loads the four U. The revised rules called units in operation than the commercial nuclear power industry. nickel-chromium the pipe weld examination sequence. ultrasound does not always pass through the weld. One of the failures did not occur randomly. for austenitic stainless steel is not a particular problem for ferritic piping since the ultrasound material. The new standards comprise separate could be justified. they were revised to a sample of 7. methods. Analysis showed that the failures could have been evaluation standards has been to show how to apply the flaw evalu- predicted.3. if at all.3. the weld will be examined 100% from the that the failure mode of austenitic piping is quite different from pipe side but only partially. Grinding welds flush is a solution to the outer surface condi- tions. with greatly simplified selection criteria. Steam Generators. these are all UT reflectors. These revisions were all beneficial to the Examination Category B-Q. counterbore will cause a mode conversion of a 45 deg. A tubing material. they also provide surface on both sides of a joint. The surface ferritic piping. flaws in austenitic welds. ential welds. led to revision of tubing had not been anticipated. and the desire to examination of pressurized water reactor (PWR) steam generator monitor growth of acceptable pipe weld flaws. metallurgical origin. however. shear wave.3. tee. In most cases. 26. per. Steam Generator Tubing. coolant piping system. In an NPS 4 other components. Initial rules required a ran. limits for protection from ductile failure.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 331 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 331 surface reinforcement. A typical water reactor (PWR) plants based on piping system function and 14 deg. The three sample problems are (1) an embedded crack in a reactor the following three sets of welds were designated: terminal ends of beltline weld. and those with minor shown that under certain conditions of secondary water treatment. paragraph III4512. There are no simple solutions to these problems.2. welds.2. with specified limits from loads imposed by Schedule 80 pipe. and IWB-3521. offset and reinforcements total equaled 25% of the circumferential welds in the reactor all exceed the allowable flaw. The most suc. The Class 2 criteria proved to be cumbersome. and sep- the UT operator. an recorded imperfections could be reviewed to determine if flaw unanticipated degree of tube corrosion and cracking had occurred. for repeating the examinations in one piping run among a group of Leakage of a few tubes during service was not considered to have similar runs. inspection interval. reactor vendors.3. Appendix A. the volume of circumferential welds to be exam. Table IWB-2500-1. was added to Acceptance Standards. and all dissimilar metal the height of the acceptable surface flaw in the acceptance stan.6 Examination of Steam Generator Tubing Need for Nonrepeating Early feedback from the field. they had many more loop during each 10 yr. -pump. 26. Approximately 10% of the welds in relief for UT reflectors of geometric and metallurgical origin. from the other side. dissimilar metal joints. to the inner one-third of the pipe wall thickness. Welds would provide timely detection. reduction in net section thickness was the criterion such can pass through the weld.7 Development of Examples of Appendix A Analysis In 26.5 Acceptance Standards for Piping The initial accep- access. The reflection of this compression wave from the in 1983. and leakage detection systems that those with the least access limitations could be chosen. for austenitic stainless steel that the combined stress intensities would not exceed the Section III piping. Neither. linear-elastic fracture mechanics is applied to assess Duty Areas Analysis of the occasional field failures indicated that the effect of flaws on the integrity of nuclear components.5. tables for welds in both ferritic and austenitic piping material and ment sufficient to permit a circumferential scan along the center include standards for both volumetric and surface examination of the weld for transverse flaws. One of the objectives of the piping examination require. but not to the inner surface conditions unless there is 26. (2) a crack in a nozzle corner.2. proving this origin is problematic for specified loading from normal and upset plant conditions.1 Allowable flaws for U-Tube In addition. or . The report includes . had been chosen following US Navy nuclear steam dom sampling of 25% of the Class 1 welds in each recirculation generator practice. Power Research Institute (EPRI) [7]. the acceptable depth and height of each exceeds seismic events and operational conditions. these are presented in Reference [12]. terminal ends of piping connected to reactor vessel or closure head-flange weld. Although they impose standards for preservice examina- Another condition requiring consideration is access to the outer tions more rigorous than those for inservice. For Class 1 (Examination Category B-J). or strains were imposed. Grinding is necessary to flatten weld reinforce. were subsequently published by The Electric training and qualification for the piping UT operator.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. the rest are With the recognition that the consequences of failure in piping pipe-to-fitting (elbow. Having decided that repetitive examinations on selected ation procedures contained in Appendix A. however. iron Alloy 600. arate criteria for boiling water reactor (BWR) and pressurized Counterbore is a more misleading geometric reflector. For Class 2 (Examination Category C-F). For an NPS 12 Schedule 140 pipe. consequently.4 Concentration of Piping Examinations to High. These criteria.3 Repetitive Piping Examinations instead of Random 26. another was to to the vessel weld standard except for a 5% wall-thickness limit on eliminate scanning for transverse weld flaws. or reducer) or pipe-to-vessel.3. which fracture toughness considerations. new bases for the standards were developed. around 1970. contrary to the original the responsibilities of the Section XI Subgroup responsible for flaw assumption.S. However.6 ined in piping of nominal pipe size 4 in. However. UT size. See 26. and (3) a crack in a piping connected to vessels. service experience had in severe radiation fields could be avoided. Appendix III. are not as serious as they are in a component. mits UT indications to be classified as either of geometric or of the criteria initially included terminal ends. A fourth category comprised additional welds so that the dards. tance standards for piping welds (Summer 1974 Addenda) referred ments was to eliminate the need for grinding. and greater was reduced for related discussion.2. Going back to the same welds each interval meant any major safety implications.

plants to consider inservice inspection in its basic design.1 Division 2 for Gas-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants of the PWR designs. tains alternative criteria based on applied stress intensity factors. (2) Division 3 for liquid metal–cooled reactors. With the shutdown of Fort St. repair would not be required if the operated in the United States and Canada within the next 5–10 yr. as evaluation of actual flaws discovered in operating reactors.” in which the Owner or oper- plant can continue in operation without repair.3 (3) Subsection IWE for metal containment and metal liners for in. having jurisdiction at the plant site within 90 days of the comple- Sample problem 3 assumes a near-surface embedded flaw in tion of an outage for which inservice inspections were conducted. .2. addressed mined to grow to 0.2. and 0.3. Owner’s Data Report—FormNIS-1—for inservice inspection the flaw was calculated to grow in depth to 0. Vrain. fit. an inlet nozzle inner corner at 75% of licensed life. We know they preexist from fabrication feasibility of the commercial application of sodium-cooled fast- because there is no known degradation mechanisms that can gen. be increased from 100°F to 192°F. in the other case. so it was withdrawn and last appeared in the 1993 the feedwater nozzle weld and a subsurface flaw 0. and with no new orders.2. Colorado. long in the recirculation nozzle weld. and rules address both the loop.0043– * 3. Clinch River was one of the few nuclear power detection is very unlikely to exceed the IWB-3600 criteria. IWB-3612 con- very brief summary of the sample problems is presented in the fol. lowing paragraphs. permissible. (but not the addition of complete systems).845 in. If the minimum leak-test temperature could (4) documentation. For (1) Division 2 for gas-cooled nuclear power plants. for which a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report A general observation that may be drawn from these evalua. In each case.3.013– . depth. deep and 1.3 in. Division 2 was developed and appeared in the 1981 tables were found in two locations: in a feedwater nozzle-to-shell Addenda of Section XI. for only a single concept of a gas-cooled nuclear power plant. wall.78– . within a 26. the initial flaw of 0. These rules.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 332 332 • Chapter 26 background and information supplemental to Appendix A. long in Division 2. breeder nuclear power plants.04– was deter.1 critical flaw size.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. boltup temperature was increased to 165°F and the minimum Other concepts. the toughness and critical flaw size would increase so that repair would not be required.81– deep * 2.or head-thickness.2. reactor vessel or head-flange weld. as well 26. operated in this country as a HTGR. the flaw was calculated to grow to 1. thus. While the Code edition sel beltline and that is found after 75% of the end-of-licensed life or addenda applicable to the original item may be acceptable.96– * 3. Repair would be required. with 2. and parts of a component or system 20% below the inner surface of a vertical seam in the reactor ves.2 in. For a BWR. repair would be required.. within a 12. although there were several During a 1974 inservice inspection of a reactor pressure vessel. the flaw was calculated to grow to a depth of 2. high and Addenda. In one case. mined to grow to 0. For the remaining PWR design. other innovative gas-cooled nuclear plant designs developed and flaw indications exceeding the IWB-3500 acceptance standard offered. near Greeley. For two 26. the duces the concept of “reconciliation. For a BWR. The reader should note that four different reac- tor designs are being evaluated. The purpose of Clinch tions is that embedded flaws not characterized as surface flaws are River. and boltup was Only a single plant. Vrain in weld and in a recirculation nozzle-to-shell weld. located near Oak Ridge. In one case.8 Analytical Evaluation In the Summer 1978 Addenda. The permissible.10 Documentation Article IWA-6000 now recognizes the wall-thickness of 9.0 in. with residual stresses 25% of yield. Evaluation in accor- dance with Appendix A showed growth of the feedwater nozzle 26. it was determined that the Additions and revisions include the following: flaw should be evaluated as a surface flaw having a maximum depth of 12. Sample problem 1 assumes a 1– * 3– flaw that is embedded appurtenances. was to demonstrate the likely to be acceptable. 26.2 Division 3 for Liquid Metal–Cooled Reactors These weld flaw from 0. 5. Repair would be required. there was no reason to continue were characterized as a surface flaw 0. the initial flaw 0. for the depth need to add repair/replacement activities to the things for which failed the criterion of 0. These requirements also include an that responded determined that no repair was required.4 1980 Edition and Addenda tion is especially critical. Reactor Plant.4. the BWR. changes due to later Codes do not violate the form. the one the depth failed the criterion of 0. those for BWR are quite different. The two PWR vendors records must be prepared.2. (HTGR). development. The NRC subsequently accepted this conclusion.07– .2. there ator must perform a documented review to show that the design was the need for the plant cooldown limit curve to be modified. Tennessee.9 in.and pool-type concepts of liquid negligible growth for the recirculation nozzle weld flaw with 3. were not expected to reach such early hydrotest temperature was 210°F.3. Fort St. A size that escapes LMFBR program.8 in. (PSAR) had been submitted to the NRC. In each calculation the flaw growth to end of life was upgrading the edition or addenda may be advantageous. with a critical flaw depth of 1.1 critical flaw size. A a second acceptance basis was added to IWB-3600.9 in. published for review and comment in 1978. This intro- minimal. was the most severe normal loading condition. repair would be required. the loop-type concept is exemplified by the Clinch River Breeder plant was permitted to continue its operation without repair. The indications 1989.5 reports. has now been expanded to include spare or renewal components. Effort to develop the ASME Code erate subsurface flaws in service. One designer commonly known as the high-temperature gas-cooled reactor determined that the residual stress requirement was unrealistic.82 in. 26. and while the three PWR configu. fluence. flaw sizes were similar. found early in service.95– * 3.36 the plant must submit to the enforcement and regulatory authorities in. to 1. and they were either acceptable for systems and components to contain sodium was part of the or undetected during Construction Code NDE.9 Replacement Items The definition of “replacement” rations are similar. wall. subassemblies.6– long was deter. The NIS-1 form becomes part of the documentation that in.4.4 in. Several of these plants were expected to be built and By omitting the residual stress. for the depth failed the criterion of concrete containment. within a 14. metal–cooled fast-breeder nuclear power plants (LMFBR). the most severe prediction being 1.0 in.1 critical flaw size. however. the vessel flange loca.5% and length 40% of shell.87– * 2. or function Sample problem 2 assumes a 34 – deep * 2– long surface flaw in and safety requirements of the item being replaced.55 in.95 in.

inspection as the main inservice inspection methods. While these rules first appeared in the IWB-3641-1 through IWB-3641-6 for austenitic piping (subject Winter 1981 Addenda. qualification procedures for such welds had not in these editions: been provided in the Construction Code/Section III or Section IX. tance standards: Tables IWB-3510-3 and IWC-3510-3 for vessel so stored energy is minimal compared with water-cooled systems. sive welding.5 in. were occasionally part of the original con- The following are some of the additions and revisions included struction process. rather than implying “just keep everything. their implementation was delayed because to a number of conditions... Article IWB-4000 added requirements for qualification of explo- (1) Expanded acceptance standards for specific applications. tubesheet 26. Evaluation of Flaws in Austenitic Piping.2. In as one found in Appendix C). report and record requirements. All of the examination. (4) Analytical evaluation of plant operating events (IWB-3700). Now. oping rules for inservice inspection of light-water reactors. a (6) Appendix VII. Tables IWC-3510-1 and IWC-3511-1 were added for Class 2 ves- sels down to 0. IWA-6000 now provides a summary of the supported were appropriate for the support attachment welds. Qualification of UT Personnel.4 Documentation: Records and Reports Article IWA.5 1983 Edition through 1989 Edition borehole plugging. result in significant changes in approach from those used in devel. 26. Table IWC-3511-2 for Class 2 nozzles in vessels. (7) Subsection IWL for concrete containment.5. Primary nesses 0.2 Specific Methods for Weld-Plugging Steam Generator Tubes While tube plugging or. a provision that also includes stor.2. welding.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. Not all the changes resulted in additional tables. and Table For these reasons.3 Subsection IWE for Metal Containment and Metal same as for Class 1 for thickness 212 in. Code/Section III should also be acceptable to Section XI. 26. These tables. a series of steel portions of Class CC pressure-retaining components not six tables of acceptable criteria were developed. Class 1 vessel standards for volumetric examinations have a Since cancellation of the Clinch River project. such as those in Appendix C.4. Angle (5) Appendix E. With the further development of analytical procedures for eval- tion of Section III Class MC pressure-retaining components and for uation of piping flaws. more often. components. Along with the expanding and dropped and the IWB-3510 tables were applied to all vessels. The more explicit requirements for each aspect of Section XI came the IWB-3516 tables for support attachment welds for piping.3 Augmenting Appendix I UT with a 70 Deg. provide allowable end-of-evaluation 1996. Another factor is the ability of liquid acceptable to Section III standards. which is not suitable for been used primarily in support of the Fast Flux Test Facility Class 2 construction because the wall-thickness is frequently smaller. and greater. isolated instances. Section XI standards tem and by deposition in another part. In a few Sodium reacts with oxygen in air and in water. however. The effect on the steam gen. LMFBR concept.” it (GTAW) welds. Subsection IWE provides rules for inservice examina. angle-beam examination for the detection of flaw indications near . and valves were dropped when it was determined that the stan- ing.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 333 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 333 Division 3 was essentially written around the Clinch River (8) Appendix C.4. welds. Division 3 has lower limit on wall-thickness of 212 in. the Section XI standards could reject a condition tected by an inert cover gas. the NRC proposed an amendment to the regulation that period flaw depth-to-thickness ratios for circumferential and axial accepts the 1992 Addenda.5. (SAW) welds. emphasis is placed on leak detection and visual IWB-3514-4 for Class 1 and Class 2 welds in piping. strong conclusion emerged regarding the effectiveness of a 70 deg. so it must be pro. The essary. but the amendment’s implementation flaws under different operating conditions. Tables were added to the Class 1 and Class 2 accep- Sodium systems can operate efficiently at relatively low pressures. and reports. and of manual (2) Specific methods for weld-plugging steam generator tubes. and fil- ing and storage requirements. Evaluation of Unanticipated Operating Events. and repairs obviously must be based on complete plans.5. pumps.2. The sodium coolant freezes at 208⬚F. with the acceptance basis the 26. (3) Augmenting Appendix I UT with a 70 deg. indeterminate. vessel weld thicknesses between 212 and 512 in.2. is attempting to focus on a minimum of requirements that are nec. a format for these records. (FFTF) at Hanford. backed up by concrete. New standards were needed for linear system components are located in cells or vaults containing an flaws detected by a method in which the flaw height dimension was inert gas atmosphere to minimize coolant reaction caused by leak. Conditioning of Class 1 and 2 Welds that Liquid metal–cooled plants have several characteristics that Require Examination.2. wall-thickness. dards for the pressure-retaining welds of the component being schedules. thick. These requirements include “checklist” forms so that IWB-3511 tables for welds in vessels other than the reactor were essential elements are included.625 in. angle beam. For volumetric examination of sodium to transport elements by dissolution in one part of the sys. could reject an indication acceptable to Section III. Beam As the European Community program on NDE progressed. dependent on the welding process: One table covers circumferen- tial flaws in shielded metal arc (SMAW) and submerged arc 26. (10) Documentation. (9) Appendix D. of fusion welding (manual or machine). Washington. including analysis by a procedure such the NRC did not incorporate these additions in the regulation.2. whereas another covers the same flaw in base mate- 6000 has been gradually expanding to include more precise rial and also covers gas metal arc (GMAW) and gas tungsten arc requirements. need for more exact documentation. A similar situ- erators is the loss of carbon from ferritic steel and its pickup by ation also existed for subsurface indications in piping weld thick- austenitic stainless steel elsewhere in the sodium system. These include tables has been delayed by other complications.1 Expanded Acceptance Standards for Specific and insulation to maintain the sodium temperature at 400⬚F when Applications The Subcommittee recognized that flaws preexisting the reactor is not in operation. test.312–0. the practice is to provide heaters 26. Additional Liners for Concrete Containment One of the objectives of Class 2 tables were added that corresponded to the Class 1 tables Section XI is to provide rules for inservice inspection of all Section III for those examination categories as well as for bolting. from new construction and acceptable to the Construction age vessels and transfer lines used during standby and shutdown.

and equipment. Conditioning of Class 1 and 2 Piping or did not anticipate. 1999 Addenda plications. Evaluation of Unanticipated Operating be retained are itemized in the following lists. there have been useful clarifications. .6 Appendix VII. In 1996. Appendix E provides procedures and cri. weld crowns are encountered with edges that may trap liquid pen- teria that may be used to evaluate the integrity of the reactor ves. Flaws are evaluated by comparing the maximum flaw dimensions deter- 26. particularly when the inservice examina- reactor coolant system’s structural integrity. (i) valve records and reports. (c) Overpressure Protection Report. The records that need to 26.2. etrant.7 Subsection IWL for Concrete Containment One of (f) nondestructive examination procedures.2.2. and ASME B31. This Appendix sel beltline. are often not suitable flaw detection. such contour- Appendix G provides procedures for defining the load and tem. It Inservice inspection records: requires knowledge of the general fundamentals of ultrasound the- ory as well as practical knowledge of the established UT techniques (a) index to record file. Chapter 29 IWB-3700. Weld crowns interfere with the proper position- first topic requires an engineering evaluation when an operating ing of the ultrasonic transducer. The application of Appendix D is recommended sharp surface flaw having a depth 14 of the section thickness and a for repairs and replacements.9 Appendix D. including radiographs inspection of all Section III components.6 1989 Edition. but imple. These rules first appeared in the 1988 addenda. the NRC proposed an amend- ment to the regulation that accepts the 1992 Addenda. additions in the regulation. are addressed. 26. ASME B31. and temperature limits.2. tion for use of the specialized techniques needed for inservice (c) inservice inspection reports. are all linked by the inservice inspection and the consequences of Section III. The tion method is UT. Two topics. and the posttensioning systems of Section III Class CC compo. acceptable for Section XI NDE. provides more detailed information regarding this subject. Events This new Appendix provides acceptance criteria for per. for the training and qualification of UT personnel of all levels. This examination was promptly methodology is based on a limit load evaluation or on elastic-plastic added to the Section XI UT scanning requirements.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 334 334 • Chapter 26 and at the surface of a component.8 Appendix C. length 112 times the section thickness. (j) pressure test procedure. The second topic requires that load and temperature provides explicit guidance regarding pipe weld surface contours conditions during reactor operation be maintained to provide pro. which surface condition requirements of their Construction Codes. The Winter 1982 oped revisions to Appendix G that may result in slightly less Addenda includes the Owner’s Report for Repairs and restrictive curves. Evaluation of Flaws in Austenitic Piping additions result from incorporation of Cases: This Appendix provides a method for determining the accept ability for continued service of austenitic piping containing flaws that (1) repair of heat exchanger tubing by sleeving. however. with the postulated flaw generally being a vice inspection.5. of the reactor vessel beltline region is given. (d) repair records and reports.2. These procedures generally define the limits on a reactor startup and shutdown pressure. nents. The following revisions and 26. (b) inservice inspection plans and schedules.2. In these Editions and Addenda. The evaluation (2) visual examination of vessel closure nuts.2. the Subcommittee devel.1.5. A choice of two methods to verify the structural integrity (b) Certified Design Report.5. This is prerequisite for training and qualifica.5. 26.3. which can mask unacceptable indications. and new Appendix modifies the requirements of IWA-2300 specifically (f) Replacement Evaluation Report. tal changes.10 Documentation While there have been no fundamen- temperature curve.5. and mentation was delayed because the NRC did not incorporate these (k) pressure test records.5 Appendix E.5. in 1999. fracture mechanics evaluations.7. 26. Qualification of UT Personnel This (e) Material Certifications. changes to the Code were intro- duced mostly through Code Cases. Because it is the ferritic portions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary. Welds that Require Examination Piping welds that satisfy the IWB-3700 is departure from other Section XI activities. Edition. (d) Manufacturer’s Data Report. Construction records: forming an engineering evaluation of the effects of an out-of-limit condition on the structural integrity of the reactor vessel beltline (a) Certified Design Specifications. ing or conditioning becomes part of the field preparation for inser- perature conditions.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.2. Additionally. not part of the piping assembly fabrication process. (e) replacement records and reports. and ID counterbore adjacent to the event causes an excursion outside the normal operating pressure weld root can produce misleading ultrasonic signals. 26. Vessel welds generally receive tection against failure due to the presence of postulated flaws in such contouring as part of their fabrication process. exceed the allowable flaw standards of IWB-3514. examinations. 1989 Addenda through the 1998 implementation of the amendment has been delayed by other com. and subsequent Appendices—to develop rules for con. Subsection IWL provides and review forms. region.5. Replacements—Form NIS-2. depending on flaw location. The need for retention of original construction records is also recognized. ditions revealed by plant operation that the Subcommittee on Nuclear Power (responsible for Section III) either did not address 26. dimensions at the end of a selected evaluation period.4 Analytical Evaluation of Plant Operating Events mined by flaw growth analysis with the maximum allowable flaw (IWB-3700) The Subcommittee has continued—in IWB-3600. Recently. rules for inservice inspection and repair of the reinforced concrete (h) pump records and reports. the objectives of Section XI is to provide rules for inservice (g) nondestructive examination records. both relating to the maintenance of the for inservice inspection.

2. by Section XI.6. and 26. the following additions and revisions were introduced: sis of steam-generator tubing–eddy current examination data to (1) Appendix VIII. the requirements for (7) ET as a surface examination.6.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 335 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 335 (3) adoption of ASNT Standard CP-189. Applying Mathematical Modeling to the development of specific techniques for the proper characteriza- Ultrasonic Examination of Pressure-Retaining Components. This as alle- (9) rotation of snubbers and relief valves. previous prescriptive requirements is that user is not restricted to (2) Appendix H. Operating experience with these (5) exemption of piping welds in containment penetrations. to on reactor vessel closure studs. of operating experience with different designs and materials. viated the need for relief requests. tional degradation mechanisms have been revealed.9 Rotation of Snubbers and Relief Valves This addition reference to ASNT SNT-TC-1A. Evaluation of Flaws in Ferritic Piping. necessitating (6) Appendix M. using a specified choice of techniques.6. See 27. configuration of the penetrations. The advantage of performance demonstration over the Examination Systems. (10) Appendix IX.2.10 Appendix IX.7 ET as a Surface Examination These changes resulted especially important by the author.6. cedure.3.2.2. that the removal of and subsequent replacement of paint or other tural integrity of these nuts. with (IWA-4132) clarifies the situation in which snubbers and relief the new ASNT CP-189.2. penetrating containment is virtually impossible because of design (4) leakage test in lieu of 10 yr.2 of Chapter 27 for more information elevated pressure once each 10 yr. The advantage is that the removal of and subsequent generator tubing when eddy current testing shows an unacceptable replacement of paint or other coating is no longer necessary as part deterioration.2. Eddy are discussed in detail in Chapters 27–31. on coated ferritic materials was accomplished indirectly by means sion replaces the requirement for surface examination of the nuts of the existing reference to the MT requirements of Section V. the user (7) documentation. A clamping device may be installed to safely eliminate 26.2. Guide to Plant Maintenance Activities and cation. testing and do not require repair. another is a significant simpifica. This revision necessitated the In addition to alternatives to the rules introduced in Code relocation of requirements for qualification of personnel for analy- Cases. for performance demonstration for qualification of eddy current examination systems and personnel.2 Visual Examination of Vessel Closure Nuts This revi. replaced by a leakage test at normal operating pressure. consequently. Standard for Qualification and valves are removed from service for program-required operability Certification of Nondestructive Testing Personnel. The advantage is that the surface examination was not necessary to verify the struc. addi- (5) Appendix L. occurs in operating plants: a small leak that is detected during operation. tion of smaller diameter tubing inside a straight section of heat exchange tubing. Those and other topics related from the incorporation of a Code Case for use of the eddy current to ISI programs. demonstrate structural integrity. Class 2 and 3 Piping Pressure Boundary Appendix IX provides tion in the preparation and performance of the test. Mechanical Clamping Devices for Class 2 and 3 Piping Pressure Boundary. 26. instead. a recommended practice. Mechanical Clamping Devices for imposed on all reactor systems. including uniform requirements for addressing a situation that occasionally pressure-temperature limitation considerations.5 Exemption of Piping Welds in Containment or control the leak until the next refueling outage. Sleeving is a process of inserting and fastening a sec. They may be later reinstalled and subject only to the required preservice inspection and pressure test 26. piping at containment penetrations have been dropped. the application of the eddy current examination to a single appli- (3) Appendix J.6. tion of the mechanisms. a process that allows the tube to remain in service. flaw evaluation. With the revision of Appendix IV.6.2.6 Performance Demonstration for ET Appendix IV (11) Appendix VI. which avoids a Penetrations Volumetric or surface examination of welds in piping forced outage of the plant. While the requirements contain many .6. Qualification of Personnel for Visual has been completely revised with the addition of new requirements Examination.6. the VT-1 visual examination coating is no longer necessary as part of a surface examination pro- was considered sufficient. and is now free to qualify specific techniques for specific applications (8) use of non-ASTM material. Assessment of Reactor Vessels with Low generator tubing examination has been that. and is not limited to steam-generator applications.3 Adoption of ASNT CP-189 This revision replaces the 26. and repair/replacement activities method for surface examination of coated ferritic material. The topics in the preceding lists are only those considered 26. with the accumulation Upper-Shelf Charpy Impact Energy Levels. Operating experience indicated which the provisions of the Code were added. penetrations has shown that periodic leakage tests are sufficient to (6) performance demonstration for ET.2.1 Repair of Heat Exchanger Tubing by Sleeving This plished through performance demonstration in accordance with revision is an alternative to plugging as a method for repair of steam Appendix IV. One ben- efit is the elimination of one of the design cycle requirements 26.6.6. The problem in steam- (4) Appendix K.8 MT of Coated Materials Incorporation of a Code Case for use of the yoke method of magnetic-particle examination 26. current examination is now referenced in the surface examination provisions. Application to coated ferritic material must be accom- 26. examination of Class 1 and 2 piping welds and attachments to the (8) MT of coated materials. Operating Plant Fatigue Assessment. Hydrostatic Test This without being subject to a formal Repair/Replacement Plan and important revision recognizes that the requirement for a test at an NIS-2 Form.4 Leakage Test in lieu of 10 Yr. inspection interval can be regarding this subject. hydrostatic. Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic IWA-2315.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. volumetric examination of steam-generator tubing. 26. of a surface examination procedure.2.

and international interest for the procedure to be qualified are examined. fective. Before Section XI came into exis- Conventionally. A benefit is that.3. Several of the teams Appendix VIII addresses the many issues and problems of participating in the international programs showed that accurate Code-prescribed UT methodology. in Section IX. nation procedures. qualification of UT procedures. ities and possibly estimate their length. See 27. quantified performance information regarding both the detection tion regarding this subject. operator passing the qualification is 90%. UT operators were content to detect material discontinu- be certified as a UT Level 2 or UT Level 3 based on the require. methodology to reliably detect all damage mechanisms in all such as IGSCC and flow-assisted corrosion. In addition. much has been learned Code-prescribed procedure.3. mechanisms. Qualification of Personnel for Visual of NDE are part of the established design factors. implementation Examination Appendix VI adds and consolidates requirements of these performance demonstration rules will eventually provide for qualification of personnel performing VT-1. qualifications have shown that many operators need training in This approach. to qualify between flaw detection and flaw sizing functions by permitting welding procedures and welders. different procedures or techniques for either function. and through-thickness location by using the equipment. piping configuration. which also provides a case-by-case basis. which has been demonstrated as inef. sizing could be accomplished by using UT techniques developed detection performance demonstration are that it eliminates the specifically to perform sizing. Performance demonstration amplitude response comparison to a reference reflector response. however. and most tions. and personnel by (c) Bolts and studs. (a) Reactor vessel shell and head welds (excluding flange welds. and personnel used to detect and nation techniques was recognized in the early 1970s by Section XI size flaws. One common concern does not exceed a false call rate of 10%. Work began in 1975 but pro. national programs mentioned in 26. height. nozzle-inside-radius areas.2. this flaws. Performance demonstra- (a) damage mechanism of interest. There was also a growing con. which had been appropriate the passing probability is only 1%. The concept of Performance demonstration requirements apply to UT exami- performance demonstration for qualification of ultrasonic exami. Performance Demonstration for and clad-to-base metal interface regions). a user can further development of Appendices I and III. An approach function in a non-NDE role. if the operator bration reflectors and real flaws. it does not verify capability of one to detect spe. cally based screening approach for qualifying a UT operator. 26. and procedure. Ultrasonic Examination Systems Appendix VIII provides for (b) Welds in piping. always perform an Appendix VIII UT system qualification by tion of the need for Appendix VIII began with the recognition that using a procedure based on the generic Code methodology. Sets of blocks containing the flaw of personnel and technique qualification programs. of and sizing of flaws. and also the burden on the Code to describe a universal nuclear plants to address specific materials damage mechanisms. cern that the UT personnel training.4 of Chapter 27 for more informa.6. Code UT experts ments of ASNT SNT TC-1A. and One conclusion of the European Community’s Programme for (d) human factors. an examination.2. resolves technical issues created by the Code in its failure to vice inspection. equipment. the probability of the was the disparity in ultrasonic response between machined cali. however. The advantages of the flaw. qualification may be limited to technique demon- (c) UT equipment compatibility with the component design or stration on a specific flaw of interest. they do pro. .qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 336 336 • Chapter 26 limitations and exclude the application to Class 1 piping but configurations. The approach used by the Code. was shown to be unreliable in the inter- techniques specific to the procedure and flaw of interest. and has the general capability of performing examina. for material examination and component construction. It NRC. Appendix VIII does not prescribe how to perform include many design and monitoring requirements. Initially. but not to personnel who mount scanning equipment or members developing UT procedure requirements.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. identifies only 50% of the flaws and has a false call rate of 30%.S.6. Section XI has required that the UT operator tence. If the round-robin programs all indicated the inadequacy of conventional operator identifies 90% of the flaws in the specimen test set and UT programs deployed by the industry. was to record indications based on signal cific types of flaws or discontinuities. formance evaluations at individual nuclear plants.2. VT-2. nozzle-to-vessel welds. can operate the tion length. demonstration using realistic flawed specimens. it contains rules for qualification or vide the user with a set of conditions known to be acceptable to the demonstration that a technique is acceptable for field use. Reference to ASNT Standard CP-189 has Appendix VIII (1989 Addenda) applies to: also been updated to the 1995 edition. Appendix VIII recognizes the need to make a distinction approach was already in use in the Code. unlike the gressed slowly as the efforts of members were directed toward conventional Code generic methodology. by means of sizing techniques developed in individual U. UT experts worldwide.2. did not Performance demonstration of flaw-sizing techniques also meet the needs of the more limited and specialized area of inser. This certification shows that the thought they could accomplish the measurements of flaw indica- operator has knowledge of the principles of UT. instead. This reduces the uncertainty associated with conventional UT. because the uncertainties 26. Of course. major challenges existed for the effective use of UT for detection The performance demonstration in Appendix VIII is a statisti- of service-induced damage mechanisms.12 Appendix VIII. Technical justifica. industry UT equipment.11 Appendix VI. and VT-3 a basis for reduction of the established design factors. equipment. Any procedure qualified in accor- was needed that accounted for the following: dance with Appendix VIII is acceptable. existing Code methods. Inspection of Steel Components (PISC) project and other interna- tional UT round-robin test programs was that a technique suitable Such an approach could not possibly be addressed in a typical for detecting flaws was not necessarily effective for sizing those ASME Code minimum generic requirement. However. The UT technique per. However. effectively address flaw sizing. thereby avoiding the need to establish such requirements on requires a statistically based qualification. tion also provides the flexibility to adapt to different damage (b) UT technique appropriate for the damage mechanism. visual examinations.

See 26. procedures using elastic–plastic fracture mechanics are used to determine the applied J-integral for these flaws. con. Assessment of Reactor Vessels with Low Upper-Shelf Charpy Impact Energy Levels For reactor 26.6. The Ultrasonic Examination of Pressure-Retaining Components major issue is the inability to develop Appendix VIII qualification Appendix M provides criteria for the validation of mathematical criteria for a reliable UT examination method for welds in cast . 13 is referenced for the acoustic emission methodology. Applying Mathematical Modeling to acceptance standards still based on volumetric examination.S. including ing cycles or plant operating data. non- from tasks that must be performed under the administrative and destructive examination procedures and records. This inclusion permits tile failure. VT-1 examination of ritic and austenitic steel piping.7 1998 Edition. and other standards.. Section V Article vides for recalculation of usage factor based on plant-specific load. Much of this savings will come through the complexity of nozzle weld examination qualifications. Evaluation procedures and acceptance 26. Development of Code Cases.7.2. implementation of risk-informed inspection programs. pages). Part 2. Evaluation of Flaws in Ferritic Piping submitted to the NRC by different utilities.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. Part 1. use of the models is expected to make a significant reduction in the rate examinations. pump casing welds is permitted in lieu of volumetric examination.6. inspections of both Class 1 and Class 2 systems. Use of these models is expected to extend $10 million dollars. protection. 26. criteria subsequently implemented in the Code as Appendix K and The following changes were also noted. CEN. responds to a request from the NRC to address reactor vessels with low upper-shelf fracture (1) monitoring flaw growth by acoustic emission.6. and pressure test technical requirements of Section XI. enforcement authorities. acceptance by analytical evaluation and a collection of records associated with containment post-tensioning systems.2.2. summary reports the Owner will submit to the regulatory and See Chapter 29 of this book for more information. in lieu of successive to Section III fatigue usage factor calculations. lb. may be included in Section II of the Code. guides for completing the NIS-1 Form (inser- and Section XI Repair/Replacement Activities This Appendix vice inspection report) and NIS-2 Form (repair/replacement activ- was developed to reduce the overapplication of Section XI ity report) were added to Appendix II.2. present estimates are that savings for U. provides the technical basis. In addition. Now. contains the basis for the simplified eval. performance demonstration qualifications to similar geometries nuclear plants over the 10 yr.19 Use of Non-ASTM Material Provisions added to the vessels with material upper-shelf Charpy impact energy levels less Foreword of the Code state that materials specifications published than 50 ft. The has been clarified between records the Owner will retain and the analytic procedure includes use of actual pipe material properties. 2000 Addenda only compared to the J-integral fracture resistance of the material. reliable. checklists of the required information were incorporated in Article IWA- 26. Guide to Plant Maintenance Activities 6000. the double that amount because of more efficient.2. it also requires the records of flaw more information. addition to volumetric examination methods permits monitoring conservative and that severe multipliers would need to be applied growth of flaws previously sized by UT. JIS.2. Case N-512.1 Monitoring Flaw Growth by Acoustic Emission This the NRC that the ASME Section III fatigue design curve was non. There are very few substantive revisions in this Addenda (blue sidering all specified design transients.2.15 Appendix K. WRC Bulletin 413 [8].13 Appendix H.4 of Chapter 27 for procedures and records. This action includes an unresolved conflict.18 Documentation It had been observed that there existed major differences in the extent of the inservice inspection reports 26. Operating Plant Fatigue Assessment This Appendix was developed as a result of concerns expressed by 26. uation procedures for Service Level A and B conditions contained (4) belated inclusion of repair by mitigation in Appendix K and Case N-512.6. IWB-3730(b) provides for evaluation using actual by national and international organizations (aside from the ASTM) geometry and material properties to ensure protection against duc. The distinction flaws that exceed the acceptance standards of IWB-3514. reflected in flaw 26.2.2.2. Efforts were directed This Appendix provides evaluation methodology for determining toward determining the information essential to characterize inser- acceptability for continued service of ferritic piping containing vice inspection and repair/replacement activities. (3) deletion of references to pump and valve testing. Implementation of Evaluation Procedures in ASME Code Section XI. and accu. and also provides (for use in lieu calculation of flaw growth at two month intervals. The Bulletin’s recommendations include acceptance (2) visual examination in lieu of UT for pump casing welds. (5) elimination of redundant repair pressure testing rules 26.2. 26. Flaws are postulated in the regions of low-impact energy. The flaws are 26.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 337 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 337 Even though the cost to the nuclear utility industry to develop models used to predict equivalence in examination coverage and and implement UT performance demonstration programs exceeds orientation parameters.16 Appendix L. repair/replacement activity reports and records.6. See 27.3 for additional information.14 Appendix J.17 Appendix M. Welds By incorporation of Case N-481. In particular. Appendix K provides procedures to demonstrate such the Code-sanctioned use of materials produced to DIN. Most changes consist of editorial “clean-up” or errata. repair/replacement activity requirements.6. To implement this clarification.7. Appendix L pro. toughness.6. of fatigue usage factor calculation) a flaw tolerance evaluation based on postulated flaws.2 Visual Examination in lieu of UT for Pump Casing criteria are provided for ferritic steel components and for both fer.2. A flow chart is provided IWA-6340 previously required only inservice inspection plans with criteria to assist in separating plant maintenance activities and reports. Criteria and Analysis Methods. which was prepared by the SC XI Working Group on Flaw The following revisions and additions result from incorporation of Evaluation. inspection cycle will be more than and reduce the number of test samples needed.

2.2. Addenda. especially important by the author. Also note related deleted. (c) Supplement 6 addresses qualification requirements for reactor vessel welds other than clad/base metal interface. In addition. provides criteria been clarified.2. ties.2.2. and for areas where application and cleanup of penetrant materials is difficult and may leave deleteri- 26. These to the Examination and Inspection tables for Class 1 and 2 systems requirements are now located in the ASME Code for Operation had previously been revised to specify only a system leakage test and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants. A hydrostatic test would be mandatory only if for modification of an item without removal of a defect.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.2 Leakage Test in Lieu of Hydrostatic Test Revisions IWV.2. experience and resolution of NRC concerns. and to recognize industry practice. not pages were included so that the revisions can be identified with specific to austenitic material. The topics in the preceding lists are only those considered (b) reactor pressure vessel shell welds. revised in their entirety. and 11 Updating (3) insulation removal for examination for leakage. and add clarity. revised in their entirety Appendix C had been for already incorporated.4 Belated Inclusion of Repair by Mitigation IWA. Addenda. ments for pressure testing after repair/replacement activities have 4340. was may be performed without removal of insulation. these provisions were omitted from the 1999 appurtenance.6 Ultrasonic Examination Coverage A new Article (12) qualification of NDE personnel for repair/replacement I-3000 Examination Coverage has been added to Appendix I activities.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 338 338 • Chapter 26 austenitic pump casing material. (2) leakage test in lieu of hydrostatic test. it appeared in the 1999 action in 26. Those and other topics related (c) reactor pressure vessel nozzle-to-shell welds. to ISI programs.7 Use of Automatic UT Scanners Provisions have to Surface Examination Surface Examination methods have been been added to Appendix III for examination coverage using supplemented by eddy current and ultrasonic examination. Requirements for and references to testing pumps and valves have been removed from Section XI. Appendix A. and repair/replacement activi- (d) bolts and studs. and 2003 Addenda (blue pages) were issued separately.2.3 Insulation Removal for Examination for Leakage For bolted connections having bolting of corrosion resistant mate- 26. evaluation procedures for part of the ongoing evolution of Appendix VIII based on field flaws in austenitic and ferritic Class 1. (6) ultrasonic examination coverage. structural overlaid wrought austenitic piping welds. for evaluation of flaws in pipe that either 2001 Edition or 2001 Addenda. is no longer limited to ferritic materials.7. of these supplements to incorporate implementing Code Cases is (4) Appendix C and Appendix H.8. Mitigation of Defects by Modification.7. 2 and 3 Items. (a) Supplement 2 addresses qualification requirements for (5) Appendix VIII Supplements 2.2. Evaluation 26. which simply referred to OM Part 6 and OM Part 10.8. 26. visual examination Rules IWA-5400.2.7. The following changes were also noted. Ultrasonic Examination. at operating conditions. require- 26. Through a publishing error.9 below.8 2001 Edition through its 2003 Addenda Procedures for Flaws in Austenitic and Ferritic Class 1. (11) design reconciliation for repair/replacement activities. remote/mechanized operation.8. (8) visual examination requirements. The same information appeared in IWA-4540. Appendix III provides requirements for .8. 6. in the listing in (10) repair documentation.8. This includes Subsection IWP and 26. 2002 Addenda (pink pages) exceed the allowable flaw standards of IWB-3514 or IWC-3514. The Case includes provisions for have the advantage of better capability than liquid penetrant for a fitness-for-service evaluation based on pump material toughness. It The following revisions and additions result for incorporation now is based on a failure assessment diagram approach. 26. Specific examination coverage require- (13) mechanical plugs for heat exchanger tubes. wrought austenitic piping welds. this has now been extended to the Class 3 Table IWD-2500-1. Many other changes (b) Supplement 4 addresses qualification requirements for the have been to consolidate requirements. particularly regarding illumination levels and personnel vision. 2. There are of Code Cases. ments are now provided for four examination categories: (14) digitization of records.2.8. 4. 26. 2. flaw evaluation. the Code more “user friendly”. and 11. In a “catch-up” action. (a) piping.2. however. examination.1 Addition of Eddy Current and Ultrasonic Methods 26. 26.4 Appendix C and Appendix H. 4. NDE.5 Elimination of Redundant Repair Pressure Testing rial with a chromium content of at least 10%. and 3 piping.8.3. and The 2001 Edition was published with the 2001 Addenda 3 Piping. 26. are discussed in detail in Chapters 27–31.2.5 Appendix VIII Supplements 2.8. Pressure Testing of Class 1. A. changes in the Supplements to Appendix VIII. Also note the Code Cases implementing these and further (9) augmented examination of containment surfaces. Through required by the Construction Code for a replacement component or a publishing error. It is now a general method. Both Appendices (1) addition of eddy current and ultrasonic methods to surface are discussed in depth in Chapter 29. SUMMARY OF CHANGES analysis of flaws in austenitic pipe. Appendix H. 26.3 Deletion of References to Pump and Valve Testing ous residue. to make clad/base metal interface of reactor vessel.9. separate diagrams for ferritic and austenitic pipe. similarly. 6. (d) Supplement 11 addresses qualification requirements for full (7) use of automatic UT scanners. Both mechanized scanners.

The words “and instrument nozzle” have added to The 2004 Edition. ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and ACCP.13 Mechanical Plugs for Heat Exchanger Tubes 26.S. IWF-1300. there are also a number of substantive revi. These respond to instances of stress magnetic. this restores inspec- tion of in-core instrumentation housings that was removed in the 26.9. 2005 Addenda (pink pages) and 2006 appropriate locations in the text referring to CRD housings. areas subject to accelerated corrosion and aging. using established industry data to set limits for welding in IWA-4511.8. IWF-2100. visual examination personnel nation and character resolution requirements. is revised to address NRC Replacement Activities Specific requirements for qualification of restrictions in 10CFR50. and (d) are revised to exclude While many of the changes noted on these ten pages are trivial. or errata. which provides the qualification requirements for importance. This makes them consistent with Appendix VIII. IWA-4131. with changing Table IWA-1600-1.5 IWB-2500 Examination Requirement Changes Provisions for mechanical plugs for heat exchanger tubes have IWB-2500(c) has been added to reference the alternative use of been added to repair/replacement activity requirements in IWA.11 Design Reconciliation for Repair/Replacement 26. VT-2. Where grid areas are designated.9.12 Qualification of NDE Personnel for Repair/ IWA-4660. IWB-3514. Also. 2210 Visual Examination has been substantially revised. In response to NRC concerns. move points sions and additions.1 Standard Units IWA-1700. Underwater Welding.14 Digitization of Records Requirements now permit tion of PWR control rod drive and in-core instrumentation hous- maintaining records in an electronic (i. Mandatory Appendix X components. Requirements have been added for examina- 26. Specifically.2. IWA-2312 and IWA-2314 have been revised in recognition of VT-2 examination provisions have been limited to criteria neces. (b). Fig.9. IWB-3500. The Addenda (blue pages) were each published with SUMMARY action included Code Case N-697 for early implementation. IWA-4120. 26.8.2.9. and IWA-6350. the testing requirements in Section XI are removed. and piping is revised to include the butter- (ten) and Nonmandatory Appendix P have been added in accor. This eliminates repair documentation requirements have been relocated from duplication with the OM Code Subsection ISTD requirements for IWA-4180 to IWA-4311(e).2. Appendix P provides 26. sary for detection of evidence of leakage. M and N from the ID surface of the clad to the clad base metal Note that these selected changes are generally listed in the interface. and VT-3 visual examination have Penetrant Examination now include lighting level requirements. without specific illumi. A General Note has been added to dance with ASME Codes and Standards policy.8.4 Welding.e. Customary and S. simplify- ing the visual examination requirements and incorporating Code 26. ing in the examination volume. General and remote examination require.3 Deletion of Snubber Inspection and Testing By sections. There are even a few requirements deleted. Tables IWB-3514-1 and 2 and Table of alternate systems of units for design and documentation of IWB-2500-1 are revised to exclude the use of Acceptance components. provides both U.9. or equivalent storage media.2. snubber inspection and 26. (c). Brazing. Figures IWB-2500-7(a).8. IWF-1300-1. Section XI now the figure to provide needed clarification. IWA-2213.2.8.I. Examination Category B-O (Table IWB-2500-1) and Fig. on irradiated material. the cladding from the examination volume associated with the editorial. introduced in IWA-4226. not in the order of Supplement 5. measurements are conducted on the entire grid area.55a.8 Visual Examination Requirements. units and permits use 3430. IWA-4530. A change removes the words “the Construction Code or” from IWA-2240 and removes IWA-4520(c).10 Repair Documentation For user convenience. Risk Informed Inspection Requirements for Piping. snubber inspections. NDE personnel qualification and certification requirements of ments have been transferred to the VT-1 and VT-3 descriptions. It restricts application of underwater NDE personnel for repair/replacement activities have been added welding.9 Augmented Examination of Containment Surfaces and IWA-2317 is revised to require written tests for initial qualifi- New requirements have been developed for containment surface cation and every 3 years thereafter. units.2. to address NRC limitations. Fabrication and Installation Activities Explicit requirements have been in place for all aspects IWA-4411 is revised and Non-Mandatory Appendix Q is added to reconciliation needed for repair/replacement activities except incorporate Code Case N-504-2 for weld overlay repair of design.9. such as for 26.8. Customary and S. IWA-6210(e). optical. similar and dissimilar metal welds in 26.2.2. particularly Case N-686.6 IWB-3000 Acceptance Standards Changes IWB- guidance for use of U.9 2004 Edition through 2006 Addenda 1974 Edition. and the deletion of IWF-5000. grids selected on a statistical basis. Standards for planar flaws caused by stress corrosion cracking.2. IWB- 2500-18 are revised. 26. nozzles.S. nozzle inside corner region (M-N-O-P). .2 NDE Method and Personnel Qualification IWA- vessels no thicker than 2 inches (not covered by Appendix VIII). 26. 4713. been restated for clarity.I. order in which they appear in the book.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. the nozzle inside corner region.2. rather than measuring wall thickness at grid inter. OF CHANGES pages so that revisions can be easily identified. now requirements for design reconciliation have been austenitic piping.8. IWA-4132. qualification requirements of IWA-2316 are revised to limit its use to personnel performing system leakage or hydrostatic tests 26. Appendix X pro- vides standard units for use in equations. IWF-1220.2.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 339 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 339 ultrasonic examination when specified by Appendix I. Figure IWB-2500-8c. corrosion cracking found in the field.2. regarding Illumination Levels and Personnel Vision IWA-2221 Magnetic Particle Examination and IWA-2222 Liquid Requirements for VT-1.2.2. 26. digital) format using ing welds greater than NPS 2. Appendix R.

including addition of Examination Categories C-B. .qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 340 340 • Chapter 26 This issue pertains to UNS N06600.Qualification Requirements for Nozzle Examinations IWC-2500(c) has been added to reference the alternative use of from the Outside and Insides Surfaces.2. Instead. and Note (2) is deleted. in 29. and 7 are significantly ments are revised to clarify the exemption limits. Examination Systems Table VIII-3110-1 is revised and Supplements ments are revised to clarify the exemption limits. and change “T” to “t” when used to indicate thick- are revised to permit the use of KIc instead of KIa in the calculations of ness of pressure retaining boundary. Appendix X Standard Units for Use in Equations is discussed Table IWE-2500-1 Examination Category E-C. an Owner shall evaluate the minor repair/replacement Appendix Q Weld Overlay Repair of Class 1. Supplement 10 is completely revised. 5. VI-4400 and VI-5000 are deleted. ment activities that do not affect the structural integrity of the con.3. age requirements for dissimilar and overlaid piping welds and noz- IWB-3611. 2420. and I-3400 are substantially revised. I-3320. and 7 (Nozzle to vessel weld). and 10CFR50. 26. IWB-3612. units in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code The equa- tainment. NRC Be careful to use only the 2007 or subsequent Editions. to simplify qualification requirements for nozzle examinations. Appendix P Guidance for Use of U. different and make a coordinated implementation impractical. Table IWE-2500-1 Examination Category E-A.11 Mandatory Appendix Requirement Changes nitudes as to render use of the Acceptance Standards as unconser. The PDI program does not allow for this coordinated 26. in Mandatory Appendix X. H.2. and IWE-5240. C-F-1 and C-F-2 address exami. 6. formed from the inside surface. Supplement 14 is added.12 Nonmandatory Appendix Requirement Changes Qualifications and Visual Examination Requirements. IWE-2320.2. Supplement 14 provides for expansion 26. Crack growth rates for Stress Corrosion Cracking are not codified and can be of such high mag. IWE. Appendix O may be used to evaluate such flaws. since a 10CFR50. pressure test requirements of IWL-5000 for minor repair/replace. zle and vessel or both sections of pipe.9. completely encasing the Supplement 13 is deleted. written practice requirements of IWA-2300. Successful incorpo. clarifying Personnel 26. are replaced to align them Appendix R. A potential safety problem may result. Table IWC-2500-1. C. IWE. acceptance remain unchanged. Personnel for Ultrasonic Examination paragraphs VII-4121. IWE-2200(c). are revised. 4122. 5 (noz- scope of the Section XI requirements. This action is the same one taken to and 1-3310. IWE-2500. and 4123 requirements for partial experience in nuclear applications are deleted. and Table IWE-2500-1 Examination Category E-G is added. VI- IWB-3660 Evaluation Procedure and Acceptance Criteria for 4320. These adminis- PWR Reactor Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles provides for eval.8 Subsection IWD Class 3 Component Requirement implementation because the examination techniques and examination Changes IWD-1220 component examination exemption require.9. expand the allowable applicability of Criteria for Ferritic Components 4 inches and Greater in Thickness Appendix VIII. nation of reinforcing plates with partial penetration welds.I. IWE-3500.9. revise Appendix G flaw evaluation criterion and will make the pro. VII-4350 is revised uation of PWR reactor vessel upper and lower head penetration for consistency with CP-189. and TGSCC have occurred.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.1. L and Q. IWB-3613 and A-5300 Flaw Acceptance zle inside corner regions.55a. Table I-2000-1 Supplement 12 allowable flaw size for fracture initiation The structural factors for is revised and relocated. IWE-2330.55a imposes a number of modifications and limitations number of errors have been found in formulas in the 2004 Edition on the use of Subsection IWE.9.9. Appendix N Written Practice Development for Qualification nate these modifications and limitations in future amendments to and Certification of NDE Personnel May be useful in meeting 10CFR50. with the Performance Demonstration Initiative (PDI) Program. To remove gross structural discontinuity as a basis for weld Code Case N-552. Examination paragraph VI-1000 is revised and VI-4310. trative requirements are addressed by CP-189. 2004 Edition.2. IWE-3122.2. Note that the acceptance standards of Appendix VII Qualification of Nondestructive Examination IWB-3500 shall not be used to accept indications in this region. Customary and S. IWE-2310. Appendix I Ultrasonic Examination is revised to: Address cover- vative. Figures Supplement 11 is substantially revised to realign it with the IWC-2500-4 (c) and IWC-2500-13 are revised to add a note to PDI Program and the current relief requests. Referenced in IWB-3662 (f).10 Subsection IWL Class CC Concrete Component Upper Head Penetration Nozzles Provides rules for flaw model- Requirement Changes IWL-5210(b) provides an exemption to the ing and evaluation. 6 (Remaining RPV welds). 26. IWL-5210 is revised to clarify that an Engineering tions in this Appendix are suitable for use with the units provided Evaluation Report (as specified in IWL-3310) is not required. volumes associated with Supplements 4. Risk Informed Inspection Requirements for Piping.55a.9. N06082 or W86182. 2 and 3 activity to ensure that the containment satisfies the requirements of Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping Weldments Provides an . and the Construction Code and the Owner`s Requirements prior to and stainless steel in both PWRs and BWRs wherein IGSCC. ration of these changes into IWE should permit the NRC to elimi.9 Subsection IWE Class MC and Metallic Liners of of Supplement 10 qualifications to permit coordinated qualifica- Class CC Components Requirement Changes IWE-1241. VI-4330. for piping weld examinations per- 2100.2. tion for Supplements 2 and 3. Appendix O Evaluation of Flaws in PWR Reactor Vessel 26. zle inside corner region). Appendix VI Qualification of Personnel for Visual cedures consistent for both evaluation methods. I-2600 and I-3200(c) and (d) are added. Revisions simplify qualifi- selection.S. nozzles containing flaws. Revisions were made address reinforcement pads that are fillet welded to both the noz.7 Subsection IWC Class 2 Component Requirement Appendix VIII Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic Changes IWC-1220 component examination exemption require.9. Table VIII-10-1. Examination Category C-A is revised cation requirements for nozzle examinations. Supplement 13 allows for a coordinated branch connection welds.2. 5 and 7. PWSCC during the performance of the repair/replacement activity. This action corrects a deficiency in implementation of Supplements 4 (clad base metal interface). Appendices A.

3. It includes requirements for be used in lieu of pneumatic leakage tests imposed by 10CFR50. 10. There are even a few requirements deleted.g. with appropriate nents increases the probability that these measurements will be editorial revisions. This change allows owners of plants constructed in accor.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.20. tion for personnel. Supplements 4 and 6 require added to incorporate Code Case N-517-1 as an alternative require. B15. renumbered and includes correction of an improper Supplement 9000.10 2007 Edition (with no Addenda) use of the term ‘Safety Factor’ is inconsistent with the rest of the The 2007 Edition has been published with SUMMARY OF Code where the practice has been to avoid the implication of a spe- CHANGES pages so that revisions can be easily identified. and IWA-4600 for repairs to and subsequent examination of This change allows the testing of the Class 1 components that are Class 1. 26. The recent discoveries of PWSCC in PWR compo- IWA-2400 and all subsequent related subsections.2. risk calculations. candidate with unintended information about the test sets. These were intended as design factors but the 26. and approval of Appendix VIII Performance Demonstration for Ultrasonic records. Table 2500-1. A written signature is no longer the only method. to the heat-affected to allow use of optometrist. IWA. examination category table requirements. and equip- tem leakage and hydrostatic tests conducted in accordance with ment for length and/or depth sizing of axial flaws. This exclusion IWA-5211(a) and (b).1 has been from “uniform” to “representative”. Glossary: Certificate of Authorization.2. Examination Systems VIII-3120(b) is revised to clarify qualifi- cation requirements for detection and sizing of axial flaws in 26. address an NRC concern. It allows an evaluation in lieu of demonstration requirements for personnel. 11. equations in the code. and when incorporating 4 different flaw depths into a test set contain- utilize the exemptions of NB-2610 (b) and (c) etc. Note that the 26. other than qualification in 26.10. e. N-566-2 and N-753. flaw depth distributions are redefined 26. needed.10. there were frequent references to safety fac- tors in Section XI. Replacing the term ‘Safety Factor’ in are a few substantive revisions and additions.2. 5. There cific safety factor or margin. authorization.2(b) and many subsequent locations. In Supplement 4 the minimum flaw size is revised to responsibilities that had been limited to Manufacturers. it is impossible to obtain a uniform flaw distribution the provisions from Section III for unqualified source material.10. thus providing defined start and stop points that are within the 0. Supplement 4 was new paragraph made it necessary to add five new terms to IWA. provisions for qualification of procedures. IWA-2316 has been revised to limit use Appendix VIII.’ With the inclusion of evaluation 10-year ISI program update.4 Owner’s Responsibilities IWA-4142. Appendix J. IWA-9000.2.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 341 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 341 alternative to the requirements of IWA-4420. many with the rest of the Code. pendent of other requirements. which bunched inspections in the first 10 years of those Appendix VIII. Recent experience pulling the bolts when leakage is found at bolted connections in a indicates that differences between examination of the vessel and system borated for the purpose of controlling reactivity. personnel. not in the order of importance. piping Supplements that otherwise contain plant operation. 2 and 3 austenitic stainless steel piping weldments with not pressurized during unit startup pressure test to be tested at stress corrosion cracking. Supplements 2. However. Category B-P is revised to add Item No. This Appendix includes lessons learned from the use plemented by providing specific leak test requirements that may of these Code Cases within the industry. allow electronic certification.2. additional examinations.75 in. N-577-1.10. or other heath care zone for Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) or the professionals to administer the vision acuity examinations inde. sometime other than during reactor startup.2. com. change-in-risk evalu- ation requirements. This provides the ment.10.1 Record Signatures IWA-1400 (q) has been added to the inside surface of unclad components. allowable RMS error. has never been used.5 Pressure Test Changes IWA-5251 has been added to accordance with Supplement 4 and 6. Section XI with the term ‘Structural Factor’ assures consistency tion of Code Cases N-517-1..6(b) reference. reevaluations. Also. examination of the nozzle are sufficient to require a performance .10. this be 50% rather than 100% of the allowable.6 IWB-3000 Acceptance Standards Changes In IWB- ing preservice inspections. this change is intended to provide guidance. the term ‘Safety Factor’ and update a risk-informed ISI program for piping as part of a normal is placed with ‘Structural Factor. and N-578-1 ing repair/replacement activities are completely revised and sup- into Section XI. editorial cleanup. a uniform distribution of flaws in the test set.10. Referenced in IWA-4411 (h). It has been removed from no provisions. ophthalmologist. is revised to clarify that 45 and 60 degree search units are also required for examinations conducted from the outside surface and 26. glossary terms. 4530. or errata. IWA-4520. is reasonable since axially oriented service induced flaws are typi- IWA-2321(b) has been added to implement Code Case N-753 cally confined by the failure mechanism. weld for Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC). Certificate Holder. The change clarifies the qualifica- 26. and the use of risk-informed methods in perform.2 NDE Method and Personnel Qualification To those piping Supplements that otherwise contain no provisions.. including incorpora. In Supplement 4 and 6. Quality System Certificate Supplement 7 is revised to require a performance demonstra- (materials). prising minor clarifications and corrections.2.2. Appendix R Risk-Informed Inspection Requirements for IWE-5220 requirements for Containment pressure tests follow- Piping Incorporates Code Cases N-560-2.7 Mandatory Appendix Requirement Changes following selected changes are generally listed in the order in Appendix I Ultrasonic Examination Supplement 9 Scan Angles which they appear in the book. and 14 may not have only to qualify VT-2 personnel that observe for leakage during sys. This Appendix allows a user to develop 3410. there are no performance incorporate Code Case N-566-2. It currently requires qualification of the exami- nation procedure and equipment and. dance with Section III to qualify Material Organizations. 3. These are ing 10 flaws. and source material. Material Organization(Metallic). Structural factor has also been added to of the changes noted on those six pages are inconsequential. utilize Additionally.3 Deletion of Inspection Program A Inspection tion requirements for length and/or depth sizing of axial flaws in Program A.

Technology that Chapter 28 and Chapter 45. 26. This is consistent with the industry’s thoroughly in Cases N-577 and N-578.11. to make them available for early implemen. verified in pilot programs at a number of power plants.2. but not all. 1. that should determine the acceptance 1000 and Q-3000 match the wording of Code Case N-740. application of risk-informed methodology to tially anticipated.2. These range from proposals to elimi.1 Risk-Informed Inspection Although experience has using acceptance criteria provided by NRC. 2 and 3 ure mode). In an unrelated development. These Cases are being implementation of Code Case N-504-2. shown that fatigue cracking has not been the problem that was ini. It is applied to piping sys- lay of a through wall defect is considered a welded repair that pen. A Code Case is an alternative and is not consid. superseding the required “essentially 100% of weld length” tation by users. address the use of weld overlay repair of defects other than stress Even though they have listed and categorized the items differently.55a requirements. risk-based analysis as a technique to focus examinations more Code Case N-711 also addresses piping welds. mostly referring to Code Cases. to clarify existing requirements based on inquiries lessons learned from use of the three Code Cases. with feed- back from the programs being used to modify the Cases. This action also resolves a discrep. rather than the has been used to address fatigue cracks as well.2. In addition. degradation mechanism and postulated fail- Appendix Q Weld Overlay Repair of Class 1. Its starting from users. 2. process. address degradation. or 3 “order of importance. This limit is consistent with the ogy is now accepted and applied in nuclear power plants and used current PDI program which indicates that examination techniques to identify and prioritize the most risk-important systems. nate unnecessary requirements based on experience and new The next step in this process is Code Case N-716.11 Current Developments Nonmandatory Appendix R incorporates the three Code Cases Many proposals for revision to Section XI are “in process” in and additional lessons learned in the pilot programs. .2 lists the items that three groups have published in the 2005 Addenda. which was another initial assumption.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. tion based on degradation mechanism. Section III Design Class. from 10 years to 20. Criteria call for application of risk-informed insights from probabilistic fracture mechanics and risk analyses. ered “part of the Code” until the content of the Case is incorporated Case N-691 provides criteria for extending the inspection inter- into the text of the Code. did not exist at the time that these assumptions were made has now ancy with 10CFR50. tems to a limited extent in Section XI Code Case N-560 and more etrates the pressure boundary. It has also shown that degradation is not a random and N-662. Further discussion of this is provided in Chapter 27. it has shown that other degradation mechanisms repair/replacement activities has been initiated in Cases N-660 are of concern. form of Code Cases. and to add requirements to address unanticipated to use risk insights to define alternative examination coverage degradation.g. sion of the background for these Cases is provided in Chapter 45. the pressure vessel industry began to recognize that examination techniques need to be based on the 26. based on methodology. The changes to Q.” mentation impractical. Its objective is efficiently. Different industry groups have identified flaws of con- Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping Weldments This action corrects cern consistently. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) technol- mentation of Supplement 2 and 3. Most. Table 26. 26.8 Nonmandatory Appendix Requirement Changes flaw of concern (e. What follows is a list of subjects and val for PWR reactor vessel full penetration shell and nozzle welds descriptions. to introduce probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and point is the results of ISI on piping systems in 32 PRW units..10. The standard and the examination requirements and methods. first ate NDE. Further discus- the Section XI committees. requirements. reached maturity and promises to provide an efficient approach to Supplement 12 is revised to be limited to a coordinated imple.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 342 342 • Chapter 26 demonstration for personnel. These associated with Supplements 10 and 11 are significantly different systems do not always coincide with the Section III Design Class from those of Supplement 2 and 3 and make a coordinated imple. It is the degradation mechanism. While the majority of the applications it is obvious that the groups are all concerned with the same of weld overlays have been to address SCC. corrosion cracking (SCC). change in Q-4000 reiterates the requirement to perform pressure The risk-informed approach combines PRA and an examina- testing in accordance with IWA-4540 and clarifies that weld over. revisions are introduced in the requirements for welds having restricted access for examination. Changes in Q-1000 and Q-3000 identified as piping degradation or failure mechanisms [9]—[11]. this repair technique mechanisms. which now permits the designation of appropri- and clarifies requirements in Nonmandatory Appendix Q.

2. Case N-661-2 als Alloy 82/182.2. B-G-2. Steam generator tubing was added to inservice inspection require- Code Case N-712 provides criteria for limiting examination of ments. Case N-652-1 Alternative Requirements to Categories B-G- 1. and each PWR 26. compo- Case N-722. navy) steam generator tubes. increasing examina. and N-641 in devel- Standard. Case N-733 provides for use of a mechanical connec- cessive inspections of piping welds containing subsurface flaws. and N-562-1 for wall thickness restoration of Class 2 and 3 pip- ment and repair techniques. lution visual examination. included tube material chemistry and fabrication processing. Improved practices in nuclear vessel material.9. BWRs. 29. oration was detected. .2. Section XI is 2003. It was also determined or eliminate examinations of reactor vessel nozzles except those that different eddy current examination techniques were required noted in those Cases. Case N-740 provides for use of a weld tion requirements for PWR ICI and CRD nozzle housings. Case N-730 provides for sel upper heads with nozzles having pressure-retaining partial. 2. (PWSCC) associated with the use of Alloy 600 and its weld met. and have been proven effective in operation. The Task Group on Inspection of Cast Stainless Steel has received results from an 26. Code Case N-697. NRC has recently published a document analysis. tions. absence of deterioration in less fre- dents. Surface Examinations. On nozzles on which there are substantially no piping On the other hand. Cases N-648-1 and N-702 reduce to visual chemistry but also water chemistry history. have shown to have limited value. Cases introduce mechanical techniques. and possible application to a Systems Code. for additional examinations of PWR components to nent. SC XI and the Regulator were unable to agree on criteria that would be suitable for a Section XI requirement. Class 1. an unanticipated frequency of damage to steam Case N-663 Alternative Requirements for Classes 1 and 2 generator tubing by cracking and corrosion had been encountered. or associated weld to increase the overall thickness to com- improve detection of boric acid leakage by means of enhanced reso. and to focus examinations on areas subject to degradation.6 includes related revisions to acceptance standards. and C-D Bolting Examination 26.11. It has become obvious that improvements are attempts to respond to NRC concerns regarding Cases N-561-1 needed both in detection of leakage as well as flaw size measure.3 Focused Examinations Work has continued to reduce NRC research project and is developing a UT process that can be or eliminate examinations that operating experience and analysis qualified under Appendix VIII. it was found that the number of variables so many different UT angles are needed for different nozzle con. use of a mechanical roll expansion technique to eliminate leakage penetration welds. 2 and 3 piping. Further discussion of Alloy 600 Examination of welds in cast stainless steel is a problem that issues is provided in Chapter 27 and Chapter 44.2. In addition. two recent provides alternative examination requirements for PWR reactor ves.9. They figurations. Further Requirements of IWE-2500. 29. including development of the recent ASME PRA encouraging use of Code Cases N-588. tion assembly to mitigate flaws in NPS 2 (DN50) and smaller provided the welds are not in piping associated with the Alloy 600 nozzles and nozzle partial penetration welds in vessels.5 includes related revisions to examination from Class 1 control rod drive bottom head penetrations in programs. Examples are: 26. steam erations. more frequent reexaminations. it also was found that a technology had Class 1 socket welds in piping to socket welds subject to outside been developed for examination of similar (assumed to be nuclear surface attack or thermal fatigue. using the eddy current method.11.4 Introducing New Technology or Techniques In established its criteria in its Technical Specification. and not only secondary-side water and pressurizer nozzles. These are being addressed by the ing. Several Code Cases have resulted from these consid. has been facing Section XI for many years.11.11.2. from vibration fatigue. In the early 1970s. Starting in addition to the risk-based technology noted above. zle and piping weld leaks.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. discussion is provided in 28. progress began toward development of mutually acceptable also adopting new inspection and repair techniques and new criteria for SC XI action.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 343 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 343 Chapter 45 has an extensive discussion of PRA and risk-based analytical methods. resulting In response to this issue. Case N-729-1 In addition to the usual welded repair techniques. attributed to primary water stress corrosion cracking factors in acceptance criteria for flaws. A phi- The requirement for UT examination of nozzle inner radius losophy of tubing examination was established based on a small areas originated based on catastrophic failures of boiler drums initial sampling followed by a expanded examination if tube deteri- and other vessels.2. and leaks/cracking in nozzle head pen.6 Acceptance Standards for Steam Generator Tubing Methods and Selection Criteria. Case N-615 permits UT as a surface examination method for 26.2. N-640. and 3. there have been a number of noz. capable of influencing tube integrity was considerable. pensate for the effect of a defect.5 International Codes A group is developing rules for inservice inspection of a high temperature gas-cooled reactor Case N-647 Alternative to the Augmented Examination (HTGR) being designed for installation in South Africa. Also. NPS 2 (DN50) and smaller piping. development of risk-informed design concepts for oping pressure-temperature operating limits in lieu of Section XI Section III.11. and fabrication rules were intended to avoid such acci. When development of specific criteria for the sampling pro- qualification of NDE procedures has proven very difficult because gram was attempted. or austenitic stainless steel issues. Appendix G requirements. Code Case N-735 reduces requirements for suc. Use of weld overlays has been expanded.44. Other Cases have provided focus on BWR for effective detection of the various combinations of these condi- vessel feedwater and control rod drive return nozzles. Case N-666 has been introduced for use of a weld overlay to Task Group on Alloy 600/82/182 Issues and Task Group on Boric restore structural integrity of cracked or leaking socket welds in Acid Corrosion. and Code overlay on the outside surface of Class 1. At the same time. quent.2 Unanticipated Degradation Since preparation of inside surface examination of Examination Category B-F and B-J the First Edition of this Guide. Case N-654 introduces application of partial structural (safety) etrations. Indications of deterioration also resulted in design. have been issued. Case N-619 eliminates examination for steam generator generator tube support design. reactions. piping welds NPS-4 and larger.

However. Steam Generator Program Guideline. are not to be interpreted as approving . any propri- ual imposition of ASME Nuclear Codes to nuclear plant construc. No one anticipated INTERPRETATIONS that the next 100 plants would be canceled.1.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 344 344 • Chapter 26 The SC XI committee is now (Feb. Only the final generation was entirely Section III. Not every Edition/Addenda is incorporated. at least partially due to an inability to Summer 1978 Addenda. but has had to be addressed with new working to a different Edition/Addenda. but obtaining and renewing accessibility waivers remains an Class 1. 3. and finally. The critics generally fail (or refuse) EPRI PWR Steam Generator Examination Guidelines.4. and ation . Proposed rules to update 26. Having parts in his oldest plants that have with. and reversing or revis.4 APPLICABILITY OF CODE EDITIONS still B31. Knowing the Code Edition and Addenda in effect at a particular tion that access for ISI would be provided. Primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) than 10 years old.2 Code Cases the Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards. It is a materials or construction not covered by existing Code rules. the 2000 Addenda has been endorsed. United States. ment programs are getting increased attention. An endorsement of a more recent edition had been plant owner. testing. ASME publishes Cases four times a year. including the Regulator. if only to expedite international These are often presented as alternatives to the existing rules. Section XI they are particularly important because during a hiatus dating other national regulatory agencies. 2004. Revisions to change this have been instance. an Another set of issues relate to the extension of plant life to amendment to the regulation adopting the 1996 Addenda became 40 years of operation and beyond. Piping was ASME B31. Code Cases were the primary means of making changes accessi- quently tempting. proposed. Each PWR must establish criteria in its by the Code. The Regulator does not get enough credit for lenges for inservice inspection rules for nuclear power plants. when the need is urgent. This means must maintain vigilance to detect unanticipated degradation that plants may be working to Section XI Editions/Addenda more mechanisms. Next generation had Section III vessels but 26. repairs. involving other published October 1. examination programs to update their 10-year inservice inspection programs. 2004 and These are issues that extend beyond Section XI.1 Editions and Addenda Many Section XI requirements were predicated on the assump. More recently. 2. rules . and that on multiple unit sites each unit may be had not been anticipated.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. This is frequently accompanied to update the examination of steam generator tubes to current by complaints about how long it takes to get something new accepted industry requirements. This endorsement has always included requirements. on November 22. expense for piping system replacement parts between those for and incorporates them by reference in the Code of Federal B31. Boiler and Pressure Vessel Subcommittees. Introduction of state-of-the-art technology into the Code is fre. effective.the-art is addressed in the FOREWORD to the Code 26. which periodically reviews all revisions to Section XI. that support for research is the responsi- This will present the writer’s view of present and future chal.“Stood the test of time”. bility of the industry. AND ADDENDA. so that the plants have time examinations can be drastically reduced. the research it supports on a number of important issues. ASME Council on Code Cases are the means adopted by the Boiler and Pressure Codes and Standards. . “First generation” plants had vessels constructed to Section I and Section VIII requirements augmented by Code Cases. . This left two problem areas–replacement parts and examination access. Vessel Committee to clarify its intent by revision of existing Separation of Code technical requirements from administrative requirements.3. or. it is not always understood that ASME itself does not provide funding to support 26. for for the owner to understand. in NRC endorsement of Code revisions between 1989 and 1998. In the unwarranted expense for utilities. 2008) considering a proposal interests.55(a). . and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. this is completely dependent on actions of the Replacement parts issues stem from the gross difference in USNRC.1 Challenges for Section XI in statements including “The Code is not a handbook” and “The One set of issues relate to the state of the industry and the grad. none were endorsed between Summer 1975 Addenda and thwarted within ASME. .4. Risk-informed revisions are addressing to examinations.2 Challenges for all Nuclear Codes Regulation 10CFR50. 26. the Boiler and Pressure Vessel (Standards) Committee itself. anticipated for several years.55(a) to include Section XI revisions through and Standards the 2003 Addenda were issued for comment January 7. and replacement of nuclear Code this. and rejected.1 systems and identical parts that must meet “nuclear” Regulations. 10CFR50. State of. concept whose time will come.3 FUTURE ISSUES the research needed to provide the technical data/basis for many of the proposals for change. and containment components and systems. etary or specific design”. and is urged on committee members by various ble to the users. What other surprises lie in store? of the 2000 Addenda also called for accelerated implementation of Appendix VIII (1996 Addenda). Nuclear plant aging manage.1 piping. and issues involving 26.3. to recognize that the committee members volunteer their time. to provide rules for requirements has been discussed. nuclear power plant is essential for proper application of Section XI ing them is very difficult. Also. While risk. there is understandable resistance within Technical Specification in accordance with Nuclear Energy Code committees to innovations that have not been proven in oper- Institute NEI 97-06. The plant owner has to live with his purchases. 1999. Application of the latest regulation to the nuclear power plants has informed technology establishes that the number of inservice been phased in gradually by the NRC. . However. the endorsement programs and requirements. tion. and that this is not a full time job for any of them. AND THE USE AND Section III did not incorporate effective rules for access for ISI CONTENT OF CODE CASES AND until all the current plants had been ordered. For application of ASME Code technical requirements by accommo. both additional conditions and exceptions to some specific provi- stood the test of time unacceptable in his newer plants is difficult sions of Section XI. A majority of the plants now work to the recognize the difference in interest between a manufacturer and a 1989 Edition.

and con- clarification or explanation of the requirements. another concept: the low-temperature heavy-water reactor An extensive sampling of interpretations is presented in (LTHWR). for example. they were initiated Brief descriptions of selected Code Cases issued since 1989 are within it. Section XI. Interpretations River site reactors. It is important for one to niques. the chairperson and another Like Editions/Addenda. The only interpretations of With reactor internal structures. Rudimentary rules for visual examination were twice every year as part of the Code distribution service. naturally one of Subcommittee secretary (who represents the ASME professional Section XI’s original objectives was to develop a corresponding staff) and then published by the ASME.4. was terminated. particularly when they address the intent of specific paragraphs. requests from outside the Committee.3 Low-Temperature Heavy-Water Reactor requirements that have become points of controversy between the Reactor concepts other than BWR and PWR have also been plant operator and the Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector or considered. and Division 3. since it pro. repairs. The list of generically the ASME-staff Subcommittee secretary. Subcommittee failed to reach consensus on its approach. Since the 1970s the Savannah . Interpretations are issued Subsection IWG. Division 2. In March 2005 the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standards approval is less rigorous than that for Code revisions and Cases. Cases are annulled when they are incorporated in the Code Vessel Committee. but they established (Table IWB-2500-1.) or have not been re-endorsed prior to reaching their expiration Since interpretations are not changes to the Code. In 1990 the U. even if they are Subcommittee members or Inspectors. and is dependent on acceptance by the NRC. Regulatory Guide 1.3 Interpretations The SC XI explained that its scope was directed toward reactor Interpretations answer written inquiries regarding specific coolant pressure boundary and associated systems and compo- technical requirements of the Code. for without mentioning some of the issues and efforts that did not Code Cases issued through 2006.147. and analytical 26. alter the requirements themselves. If the panel is not unani- acceptable and conditionally acceptable Code Cases is updated mous. doing so will assist ments and. the DOE was reacting to a fed- because the Operations and Maintenance Committee now eral directive to adopt established national standards in lieu of fed- addresses the content of those subsections. is well along in the process. Interpretations that do not involve intent can be accepted by unani- all Code Cases listed in Supplement 3 (2007 Edition) and beyond mous vote of a five-member panel. chairperson and vice chairperson. It should be noted.5. ASME Code Cases Not 26. Revision 15. the SC XI was asked to develop rules for inservice inspection of reactor coolant pump flywheels. They are intended to provide nents of Section III and other ASME Code Construction. which case a two-thirds vote is required for acceptance. In addition. Rules for intent interpretations have Testing of Components of Gas-Cooled Plants. It has been accompanied by Regulatory Guide 1.2 Core Support Structures vide ASME Code Interpretations. such interpretations Rules for Inspection and Testing of Components of Liquid-Metal must now be accompanied by a Code revision that incorporates Cooled Plants. Further discussion of issues regarding response to an inquiry sometimes includes a revision of the ques. later. October 2007. the process for date. covers Cases approved by ASME up to November 2005 (up to Case N-706). where the interpretations are selected from those the ASME to develop inservice inspection rules for Savannah that address light-water-cooled reactor systems. The process of addressing inquiries to the Subcommittee is gram. The power plants and the NRC now resolve prob- tutes an unfair use of the Subcommittee’s time. Department of Energy (DOE) asked Appendix B. 26.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 345 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 345 Code Cases listed in previous Editions of this Guide have been Maintenance Committee is an ASME Nuclear Codes and dropped if they are no longer listed in the current Code Case Standards Committee independent of the Boiler and Pressure book. Rules for Inspection and the NRC staff or site inspector.5. comprising the Subcommittee will remain available for use until annulled. Examination Category B-N). gradually become more rigorous. for these have been used to clarify 26. or advice to a utility on how the Case may A history of Section XI’s evolution would not be complete be applied. in periodically by revision to Regulatory Guide 1. A are not considered part of the Codes per se and do not provide new Subgroup of SC XI was established to develop a complete pro- rules. including evaluation standards and repair/replacement tech- explained in Appendix V of Section XI. Committee took action to eliminate Code Case expiration dates. were developed but with only very limited applica- them and must also be voted by both the Subcommittee and the tion. being part of significance are those that have been sent to the inquirer by the the scope of Section III (as Subsection NG). These include Cases that provide new (alternative) techniques for examinations.147. reactor internal structures may be found in new Chapter 41. the the Subcommittee in developing a timely reply. are not authorized to pro.5. 26.S. This initiative was part of a reactor safety that address Subsections IWP and IWV are not mentioned improvement program. This activity consti. the effort between different groups within one company.193. but they do not sequently declined the request.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. for result in final action by the Committee. After several years of work to establish generic require- follow this process when submitting an inquiry. use of Code Cases in the United States member of the Subgroup in whose jurisdiction the inquiry falls. become increasingly important. to separate PWR and BWR requirements. excluding fuel. Subcommittee lems on an individual basis.5 EFFORTS THAT DID NOT REACH Approved For Use. PUBLICATION vides the reasons for non-acceptance. these were publication in 2008. In some cases. A further revision to these Regulatory Guides. BWR tion to better define it for general application. in others. the interpretation may be sent to the Subcommittee itself. Individuals. (The Operations and eral standards whenever feasible. and however.1 Pump Flywheels evaluation. presented in Appendix A. This also has been very useful. providing a basis for correc- tive action by ASME. Almost from its inception. Interpretations have Reactor Internals and Other BWR Issues. that the process is occasionally misused to settle disputes because industry interest and support had diminished. There has also been extensive work to develop rules for Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee.

” production reactor to be designed and fabricated in accordance Welding Research Council. Past. O. J... E. was cancelled and the existing reactors were shut down. Maccary. May 1980. Bulletin 413. O. J. WRC 382. New York.” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology. Testing. and Maccary. The paper reviews all of these and consoli- dates the information with a set of statistical procedures. Division 1. S. R. Bulletin 382. Bulletin Ultrasonics. Mech. and Chockie. O. and Future. 11 API 579 (draft). L. New York. and 251J. conclu- sions. S. E. C133/82. The references listed in this paper include Inspection: Wendell Johnson. This work describes the chal- 8.. “Development of Criteria for Assessment of lenges for UT reliability and reproducibility imposed by inservice Reactor Vessels with Low Upper-Shelf Fracture Toughness. Bill Anderson.” 6th International Conference on Nondestructive 343. EPRI NP-1406-SR. with Section III.” Periodic July 15.. R. 1997) (SGWCS #93-30). (1993). There is also an extensive explanation of adop- Preparation of this chapter would not have been possible with. the third in the series of definitive papers. 26. and Gil Millman. WRC 252. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI.S. sure vessel integrity. it was logical to follow with an inservice inspec. “Pressure Vessel Reliability. (1997). The need for additional requirements is also described. tion and enforcement by the NRC. WRC 413. Pressure Vessels. R. C26/72. F. 202. Mech. 203. Present. “Ultrasonic Service Inspection Safety Philosophy for U. 1991. Research Council. In 1991.. Recommended Practice for Fitness-For-Service.. Nondestructive Examination for Nuclear Vessels and Piping. pp. (1980). I. and Spencer Bush.. and Maccary. Mech. F. New York. reports of vessel failures from around the world as well as a statis- In fact. Feb. NUREG CR-3110. Welding Research Council. and Hughes. It represents the first step in reducing Demonstration... “Reliability of Nondestructive Examination. The the dependence of flaw sizing on artificial reflectors in ultrasonic American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Buchanan. Life Assessment Engineers.” Special Examination of Welds in Nuclear Vessels. The American Society of Mechanical vious chairmen of the Subcommittee on Nuclear Inservice Engineers. Vessel Technology. Vessels.. Bush. New York. Nuclear Power Evaluation and Sectioning of PVRC Flat Weld Specimen 201. tially complete draft document. PISC-II Report No. Inspection of Pressure Vessels. the Ultrasonic Examinations of PVRC Weld Specimens 155. with plans for a new tritium Reactors. OECD Nuclear limited expansion and extensive refinement. and Hedden. E. (1989). and recommendations.” Chapters Nuclear Power Plant Component. I acknowledge the efforts of the pre. “On Developing New Rules for Ultrasonic Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI. 1996. New York.. Draft C. where it was identified as the Proposed Code Case for Low-Temperature Anderson.” Programme for the Inspection of Steel Components.A. “The Heavy-Water Reactors. W. The tion program based on Section XI. The references also include field efforts and the efforts of their counterparts at the NRC: Ray experience and proposals for periodic inspection to maintain pres- Maccary. I. The first decade’s experience applying Section XI is reviewed. 113. Division 1. an SC XI Special American Petroleum Institute.” Journal of Pressure past 30 years.8 BIBLIOGRAPHY ASME Section XI archives for possible future use. “Destructive Examination of PVRC Weld Flaw Size and Flaw Characteristics in Thick Welds with Specimens 202. NRC. I. and 203 by Standard and Two-Point Coincidence Methods. “Development of In- 1. “Overview of the ASME Section XI ferences in UT amplitude between flat-disc. This report documents the dif- 6. Mech. H 10. R. The ASME was requested to place the document into the 26. F. Adamonis. R. and Hedden. H.’” Periodic Inspection of Pressure 3–5. F. Methods. Volume 1— Failure Mechanisms and Corrective Actions. describes the two years since the previous paper as a period of 4.. and Pawlowski. WRC 343.. H. 12 EPRI NP-719-SR. Working Groups. Energy Agency. 1978. D.” Category B-J Piping Welds.” Plants. Flaw Evaluation Procedures—ASME Section XI. “Extended Research Council. Bush. (1982).” Welding inspection and how Appendix I was intended to address those needs. (1970). C75/74. Larry Chockie. H. CSNI No. S. Changes in philosophy based on this experience are discussed. there was no need for the approval of and publication of the docu- ment. This... (1974). Working Group was formed. 121.” Welding Chockie. Rules of the 1974 ASME Section XI Code ‘Inservice Inspection of 3. Bush. (1972). “Nondestructive Examination Acceptance Standards Technical Basis and Development for ASME Hedden. artificial-calibration Code Relating to NDE and Ultrasonic Examination Performance reflectors and natural flaws. out the devoted effort of all the Subcommittee members as well as its Subgroups. O. A. Revision 3 (it was last revised on ASME Section XI Code. however. R. and Task Groups over the Bush. Code Hedden. Session 5. The American Society of Mechanical ASME/RAS/MINATOM Forum. Z. S. Hanover.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. E. Cowfer. “Analysis of the basis for development of Section XI by its primary authors.. (1979). H. Aug.. S. 170–173.7 REFERENCES Bush. examination calibration blocks. Report No. Section XI would not exist had it not been for their tical analysis of those failures. 5. By 1997 it had developed an essen. J. Deputat.I. In particular.6 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS requirements are described. “Evaluation of the PISC-II Trials Results. H.. C. L.” Periodic Inspection of Report. This paper is a brief overview of the technical basis for . and new 26. 7. 1983. “Evaluation of 5.” Periodic Inspection of Pressure Vessels. 1975. New York. T. (1976). However. 1986.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 346 346 • Chapter 26 River site has had a periodic inspection program in place that is 10.” Welding Research Council. E. “ASME Code Section XI Approach to Case N-560. 9. Mazurek. C206/76. J. Alternative Examination Requirements for Class 1. “Nuclear Piping Criteria for Advanced Light Water based on NRC publications. D. R. Bulletin 257. Bulletin 252. C. Sept. When funding for the new reactor Special Report. Vol. (1996). WRC 257. This is the first of a series of definitive papers describing 2. F.

This bulletin dis. Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components. A. 1992. H.K. and have not been re-endorsed prior to reaching their expiration date. C78/74. NDE of Utilities and Report No. (7) New application . 2987. Proceedings Vol. Design Code edition.4.” (W. A. answer”by using a particular technique. WRC Bulletin 387. 4—“The Russian Approach to Reactor Pressure “Augmented Scope of the 1974 ASME Section XI Code ‘Inservice Vessel Integrity. “Progress toward Assessment of Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity. This report where they are listed chronologically. Nov. Although this review does not “give all Welding Research Council.” Welding Research Council. C. April 1997. acceptability of Cases is discussed in 26. Y.” Prepared by will remain available for use until annulled. N. There may be many addi- tional Cases of interest to the reader.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 347 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 347 Section XI flaw detection and flaw evaluation approaches. and French Approaches to Reactor Pipelines. 2—“U. inspection methods used. This was the result of a tech. Vessels. and W.” it does provide a summary of the progress reached nical review and solicitation of needs from the industry and inter. not all the Water Reactors. E. ested parties. Within be reviewed to see what techniques have already been tried and the 3 years Section XI had taken action on most of them.” (T. This paper discusses a number of Pressure Vessel Integrity. Recommendations are (2) Examination program made for future study. Nov. “Nuclear Piping Criteria for Advanced Light. Report No. Dragunov. 1993. and failure mitigation This collection of brief descriptions of Section XI Code Cases measures taken. Feb. prises the following four reports which serve as Appendices to ing the introduction of experience-based and risk-informed Bulletin 387: methodologies. O. The improved reliability provided by Appendix VIII UT qualification. calibration standards. It also reviews efforts being made at the time of is far from complete. W. actions to detect the conditions. most often rep- vides recommendations for consideration by Section XI. 3—“Background of the Factors of Safety Used in cessful operating experience and the acceptance of probabilistic risk Division 1 of Sections III and XI of the ASME Rules for assessment technology. Griesbach. It finds that the method for generating operating (1) ASME stamping and certification pressure-temperature curves is conservative. histories for each of these mchanisms (see Table 26. “Recommendations Proposed by the PVRC Program for the Inspection of Steel Components (PISC-II and Committee on Review of ASME Nuclear Codes and Standards. In March 2005 the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standards Committee took action to eliminate Code Case expiration dates. Scarth) Regulatory Acceptance of Risk-Informed Inspection Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.” (Y. Requirements. Buchalet. D. E. Bush. (1974). a survey 26. programs directed toward removing unnecessary examinations from Server) the ISI program. extensive recommendations for mitigation and detection methods. for the plant Owner. (1996). the answers. “White Paper on Reactor Vessel Integrity all Code Cases listed in Supplement 3 (2007 Edition) and beyond Requirements for Level A and Level B Conditions. L.” Welding Research Council. It presents case dropped if they are no longer listed in the 2007 Code Case book. 1992. S. Ivanov. Report No. and N. It com. and personnel design and operating conditions. WRC Bulletin 376. the Section XI Task Group on Reactor Vessel Integrity The Cases are grouped into a few broad subject headings. combined with the results of 20 years of suc. extent of their success when they are subjected to an objective round-robin evaluation..” Prepared by the Section XI Task Group on Fatigue in Operating Plants. This bul- letin reviews the ASME Code approach to fatigue design. 1993. cusses the major failure mechanisms observed in nuclear power Code Cases listed in previous Editions of this Guide have been plant piping during the 30 years prior to publication.. includ. 1— “Review of Procedures in the U. G. most of which are directed at Section XI. I. It discusses the many changes introduced since the Examination Techniques. this Bulletin should dations for action.2). Nuclear Vessels. June 1993. qualification and dimensions for essentially all reactor vessels.2.” PISC-III) relevant to UT. resenting savings. Dec. NRC’s position on Actions. and pro.9 APPENDIX A: CODE CASES of fatigue failures. R. Biryukov. R.” (D. for the Hedden. F. has revealed a number of opportunities. Procedure for Piping and Heavy Section 1971 Edition and incorporated in the 1974 Edition. on the various problems before the projects were terminated. and Maccary. P. “Interpretive Report on Nondestructive Section XI. Subject headings: reviews the basis for the Code Appendix G method for brittle frac- ture protection.. C. and the need for Before anyone is convinced that he or she has “found the interrelation of their requirements.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. (4) Flaw evaluation (5) Pressure tests WRC Bulletin 386.’” Periodic M. the author feels have a definite economic impact. Since ASME publishes WRC Bulletin 382. It contains over 100 recommen. This Bulletin reviews several project summary documents from the European WRC Bulletin 370. These Cases are those issued since 1989 that its publication to improve the design and analysis process.” SPIE Conference. I. including Cases are annulled when they are incorporated in the Code or numbers and causes of failures. Fil) Inspection of Pressure Vessels.” Welding Research Council. This report also includes tabulations of (3) NDE: Techniques. “International Views on Reactor Pressure (6) Repairs Vessel Integrity. and Cowfer. Cooper) Johnson. “Metal Fatigue in Operating Nuclear Power Plant. Section III and Section XI Cases in the same volume. Welding Research Council. This is the second in the definitive series of papers on the development of WRC Bulletin 420..S. Maximov. Mech. materials. Report No. Welding Research Council. S. Volume 1—Failure Mechanisms and Corrective missing numbers represent Section XI Cases. related to Section III and Section XI.

147 Risk-Informed ISI program and has established streamlined cri- specifies an enhanced visual examination with 1-mil resolution in teria for pilot plant applications that have been approved by the lieu of UT. upgrade stock material. Examination B-O for welds in control rod drive (CRD) housings. N-577-1.147 pro. It contains a less rigorous N-619 Eliminates nozzle inner radius UT examinations for dependence on the plant specific PRA in the development of a steam generator and pressurizer nozzles.15.) NRC and are expected to be brought back into the Code. (Regulatory Guide 1. C-F-2. (Regulatory Guide 1. N-577. Examination Category B-E (1980 N-697 Provides examination requirements for welds in PWR in. Table IWC-2500-1. N. N-560-2. plants having partial or full penetration welds in Class 1 compo- N-652-1 Reduces number of examinations of bolting for heat nents fabricated with alloy 600/82/182 material.1. Estimated to be at least $200. These requirements may are discussed in 28. Criteria call for application of risk-informed insights from (b) fabricated from PWSCC resistant materials. N-560-1. requirements of Table IWB-2500-1) to be performed for PWR trol rod drive return line nozzles. This was developed per fatigue. N-578. importance ranking selection process is followed. N-577-1 and N-578-1 Provides requirements for risk-informed N-716 Provides alternatives to requirements for inservice and inservice inspection of Class 1. It pro- tance criteria provided by NRC. and R-A. cant economic benefit with minimal effect on overall risk. These Code Cases some preservice inspection of piping. Examination Category B-P (1980 Edition 40 years to 60. This Case is discussed in 27. Tables are B-J piping welds from 25% to 10%. or transfer Code material between plant sites. 2000.2.15. or to 20. The Case excludes BWR feedwater nozzles obtaining a Code stamp. without obtaining a Code ments of Table IWB-2500-1. and core instrumentation (ICI) housings and alternative requirements IWB-3000. through 2004 edition). A Table is provided identifying areas susceptible to out- request of an overseas user. Edition through 1992 edition). exchange. Category B-J applies to implementing risk-informed A. and purchase small products. Also note Cases N-619 N-528-1 Provides criteria for plant operators to purchase.578-1 This permits a significant reduction in qualification and scanning and those of Appendix R. ASME Stamping and Certification N-702 Reduces method and extent of BWR Category B-D N-517-1 Provides criteria for plant operators to qualify material examinations of nozzle inner radius and nozzle-to-shell welds to suppliers. Cases N-560. pumps and valves in Class 1 and Class 2 systems. (See ments for some socket welds of Examination Categories B-F and Regulatory Guide 1. Analytical parameters are provided for characterization of These add ICI welds to the program. IWB-2400. The examinations may be limited to areas identified by the N-575 Provides examination volume requirements appropriate Owner as susceptible to outside surface attack or to thermal for set-on type nozzles on reactor vessels. without nozzle inner radius. grams using Case N-577 and N-578. 25%. C-F-1.193) side surface attack. propagation. provided a specified risk. IWB-2200. cussed in 27. This has signifi. to continue the implementation of operating experience that has 1 satisfied NRC concerns. Revision. (Regulatory Guide 1. 2 and 3 piping. N-712 Provides an alternative to surface examination require- because it concentrates on the most significant examinations.193) B-J. This can result in substantial ben. and control rod drive return line nozzles. N-691 Provides criteria for extending the inspection interval for (a) fabricated from UNS N06600 material with UNS N06082 PWR reactor vessel Category B-A and B-D welds from 10 years or UNS W86182 partial-penetration welds. This Case is dis- exchangers. . previously limited to N-Certificate holders. This Case may be discussed in Chapter 45. N-663 Limits surface examinations of welds in Class 1 and N-729-1 Applies to examination of PWR reactor vessel upper Class 2 piping to areas identified by the Owner as susceptible to heads with nozzles outside surface attack. in Chapter 45. and N-648-1 regarding nozzle inner radius examinations.) The Case excludes BWR feedwater nozzles and con. Code Case N-716 has been developed time. specifies an enhanced visual examination with 1-mil resolution in N-722 Provides a table of examinations (in addition to the lieu of UT.43 and. The between Owners. N06690 or UNS W86152 partial-penetration welds. Examination Program inservice inspection programs using Case N-560 and Category R- N-491-2 Introduces a reduced examination program for compo.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 348 348 • Chapter 26 A. A applies to implementing risk-informed inservice inspection pro- nent supports. extensively. provided for determination of alternative examination volumes. Appendix R and stamp. been gained through these efforts. Risk-informed ISI programs Class 1 nozzle weld configuration. Case applies to Examination Categories B-F.000 /vessel/interval. B-J. (See Regulatory Guide 1. (Regulatory Guide 1. The Owner must determine N-560-2 Permits reduction in examination of Class 1 Category the degradation mechanism associated with the weld.147 provides conditions for acceptance) Case N-560 for piping welds that cannot be completely examined N-573 Provides for transferring weld procedure qualifications due to interference by a permanent item or part geometry.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.147 Code Case. all activities N-711 Provides alternatives to examination coverage require- reserved for ASME Code stamp-holders. N-648-1 Permits nozzle inner radius VT-1 visual examinations Chapter 45 contains the details specific to the application of this for reactor vessel nozzles in lieu of UT. The required examinations are given in Table 1. such as UNS probabilistic fracture mechanics and risk analyses. 3 piping or Non-Class piping for plants issued their operating ume requirement based on current replacement steam generator license prior to December 31. vides alternatives to examination requirements of Table efits for units that have had their operating license extended from IWB-2500-1. using accep. also be used as additional requirements for examination of Class N-593-1 Addresses another alternative nozzle examination vol. have been developed for 95% of the plants in the USA and many vides conditions for acceptance) others around the world using combinations of industry topical N-613-1 Reduces examination volume of Category B-D nozzle and technical reports and the methodologies contained in Code welds in adjacent material from 1/2 shell thickness to 1/2 inch. and permits visual in lieu of volumetric examination of the –all activities reserved for ASME Code Stamp-holders. and move the CRD weld susceptibility to crack initiation and the potential for crack examinations from the outside to the inside surface.

A. ciled. when physical interference exists in a required examination area/volume. N-516-3 Introduces methods for underwater repair welding. tinuously pressurized during an operating cycle. for repair welds using the temper bead technique. This Case is discussed in N-658 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplement 2. This Case is discussed in 27.4.3. N-629 Allows use of fracture toughness test data in lieu of N-567-1 Removes the requirement to reconcile administrative Appendix A and Appendix G methods to establish a fracture. surface examination of Examination Category B-F and B-J piping N-498-4 In lieu of the 10-year system hydrostatic pressure test for welds NPS 4 and larger. N-504-4 Permits use of local weld overlay for repair of defects N-696 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplements 2. N-731 Provides. (See N-513-2 Provides criteria for temporary acceptance of leakage Regulatory Guide 1.147 requires that work be performed N-641 Provides alternatives to Appendix G. that only the surface examination drive nozzles. Pressure Tests N-552 Permits computational modeling for qualification of Both theses Cases provide substantial benefits to the Owner.7 requirements need be met. An evaluation of both bolting This Case is discussed in 27. and and wall thickness restoration for austenitic piping.9. (Supplement 14).9.2420 N-643-2 Provides. 3. Repairs and VT-3. (See Regulatory Guide 1. Calibration Standards.14.2. (Regulatory Guide 1.4.4. as an alternative to the acceptance criteria of N-747 Provides. N-573 Provides conditions for transfer of welding or brazing sures. A. discussed in 27. permits a leakage test at N-553-1 Permits eddy current as a surface examination method. in lieu of qualifica. is detected at bolted connections.) overpressure system effective temperatures and allowable pres. When specific conditions are satisfied. nozzle inner radius examination techniques. Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) between Owners. This Case is 31.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 349 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 349 N-735 Provides alternatives to the requirements of IWB. formance demonstration for examination of the inner 10% of that for portions of Class 1 safety injection systems that are con- unclad RPV welds excluding flange welds.11. This Case is discussed in 29.3. A. The setup and conduct of the test is simplified.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. nominal operating pressure and temperature in lieu of hydrostatic N-615 Permits UT as a surface examination method for inside test.32. or in UNS W86082 in PWRs. N-705 Provides alternatives to IWA-3000. acceptance criteria based application of 1. Examination Category B-A Item No.1.14. in lieu of the requirements of IWB-5221(a). requirements when obtaining a replacement to an earlier Code toughness based reference temperature.4. for calcu. and component material for joint/structural integrity is required. This Case is 10 for piping examinations conducted from the inside surface discussed in 27.32.40. Class 1 and 2 systems (Category B-P and Category C-H).1 and 28. IWB-3611 or IWB-3612. Replaces Case N-480. A-4300. B1. N-686-1 Updates visual examination requirements VT-1.147 provides conditions for acceptance) N-664 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplement 6 for per. provides conditions for acceptance) N-416-3 For repairs and replacements. This Case is discussed in 31. 28.193) Also see Case N-661. plant operation can contin. .6. VT-2. in UNS N06600 or W86182 in either BWRs tally assisted cracking is a factor. and a severe and tion on a multitude of configurations. The Case does not apply to welds in austenitic stain. when performing single-sided access performance demonstration. (Regulatory Guide 1. This Case is discussed in 27. This Case is dis- N-460 Redefines full examination coverage to accept 90% cussed in 27.2. The Case provides processes for structural integrity Personnel Qualification evaluation and degradation growth evaluation. or PWRS. N-654 Provides. as an alternative to the fatigue growth or IWC-2420 to determine the need for successive inspections of behavior characterization in Appendix A. Flaw Evaluation tion of Class 2 and high-energy Class 3 ferritic steel piping. NDE: Techniques.5. only the technical/design requirements need be recon- Curve” approach. for volumetric and partial safety factors. a characteriza- piping welds in which volumetric examination has found subsur.) Several conditions for the evaluation are listed. (Regulatory Guide 1. IWC-3120 and IWD-3120 for temporary acceptance of degradation. cussed in 27.9. including leakage. similar metal piping welds. (See Chapter 29 for more information. surface examinations of the reactor vessel head-to-flange weld.3 and 29. N-562-2 Permits local weld overlay for wall thickness restora- ue until a scheduled outage. (Regulatory Guide 1. the pressure N-683 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplements 4 and 6 associated with a statically-pressurized safety injection system of for determining the maximum allowable number of false calls a PWR may be used.7. This is the “Master edition. under a NRC-approved Quality Assurance program meeting lating pressure-temperature relationships and low temperature Appendix B of 10CFR Part 50.147 potentially limiting design transient is eliminated. N-432-1 Permits the gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) process N-695 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplement 10 for dis.3 and tion of Class 3 moderate energy ferritic steel piping. environments when susceptibility of the material to environmen- less steel in BWRs. leakage test at nominal operating pressure. permits a N-653 An alternative to Appendix VIII Supplement 11.193) N-597-2 Provides new criteria for analytical evaluation of pipe N-566-2 Provides alternatives to IWA-5250(a)(2) when leakage wall thinning due to erosion/corrosion. in lieu of the requirement of Table IWB-2500. N-694-1 Provides criteria to justify continued operation with- after a preservice or inservice ultrasonic examination has been out repair of flawed PWR reactor vessel upper head control rod performed with no defect found. heat exchangers. This Case is dis- during operation from Class 3 low and moderate energy piping. tion that may be used for ferritic material in PWR primary water face flaws. and and tanks.147 adds conditions for acceptance) N-561-1 Permits local weld overlay for wall thickness restora- A.3 and Chapter 29. in moderate energy Class 2 or 3 vessels.14. G-2215.

sioned) reactor vessel as a container for shipment of other ment to the requirements of IWA-1320. This Case provides a (scrapped) materials to a disposal site. ification of temper bead welding of QW-290 (Section IX) in lieu nique without use of preheat or postweld heat treatment. and ISI. examination and testing. (3) Examination Program requirements for deposition of weld overlay on the outside sur. installation. and ISI. that areas of Class 2 and 3 carbon steel raw detailed subject index and a numerical index based on Section XI water piping experiencing internal wall thinning from localized paragraph numbers. Although the examples that follow are specified requirements. of IWA-1600 when postweld heat treatment will not be per- vides for repair of leaking stub tube welds without draining the formed. which include evaluation. which include values for tation was issued. as an alternative to replacement or internal The ASME Section XI volumes of interpretations contain a wall weld repair. tions.14. PSI and ISI. examination. may be restored by weld overlay of the outside surface. they are. reactor vessel. New Application N-638-4 Permits the general application of N-606 criteria. This Case does not apply to conditions involving any form paraphrased to keep them brief. informative. a number in parentheses will appear at the beginning of fication. as an alternative to the provisions of IWA. Before that publication. 27.14. component. Work shall be performed in accordance with the be of interest to the reader.14 and in Chapter 45. its number. Owner’s Report Forms. N-740 Provides. in the author’s opinion. secutively. not complete. where in sequence the question falls. This Case is interpretations were issued only to the inquirer and to the con- discussed in 27.) Volume 1. examples in this collection are grouped into several broad subject Regulatory Guide 1. (Regulatory Guide 1. or associated weld to Qualification .7. so it is evident from the gaps in the number sequence ness restored externally by a weld-deposited overlay on the out. Volume 11. (See Sections B. Quality Assurance.147 adds conditions for acceptance) 26.147 adds conditions for acceptance) acceptance) N-660 Facilitates application of risk-informed methodology to N-618 Provides criteria for one-time use of a (decommis- repair/replacement activities (Case N-662) by providing a supple. ASME. where they are listed chronologically. each paraphrased description. that there are many other interpretations on subjects that may side surface.10 APPENDIX B: INTERPRETATIONS N-661-2 Provides. cavitation.15. (Regulatory Guide 1. This Case is discussed in 27.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 350 350 • Chapter 26 N-600 Provides conditions for transfer of Welder Performance increase the overall thickness to compensate for the defect. which include revisions of a requirement may nullify an interpretation for appli- structural integrity evaluation. This Case is discussed in reactor vessel. (Regulatory Guide 1. issued in 1982. (Regulatory Guide 1.) nozzle partial penetration welds in vessels originally constructed Application of an interpretation is limited to the edition and to Section III. in lieu of the requirements of IWA-4420. Work shall be performed addenda of Section XI stated in the interpretation volume. which include initial evaluation. (4) NDE: Techniques. N-662 Provides risk-informed alternatives to Section XI it was a bound publication that included interpretations from the requirements applicable to repair/replacement activities. including paragraph refer- discussed in 27. process for determining Risk-Informed Safety Classification (RISC)for pressure-retaining items and their supports. design.147 cerned committees. corrosion. plant-specific procedure quali. They are also N-661.5 for tion to mitigate flaws in NPS 2 (DN50) and smaller nozzles and examples.14. This Case is interpretations for the exact wording.147 provides conditions for acceptance of headings. and 3. Class 1 or B31.12. N-606-1 Provides criteria for repair of BWR CRD housings or N-762 Provides for use of the requirements for procedure qual- stub tubes using automatic or machine GTAW temper bead tech. ences. Later in accordance with the specified requirements. with vol. including corrosion-assisted cracking. final An interpretation that has been revised has an “R” at the end of examination and testing.147 provides conditions for acceptance) A.14. the “1” that appears after XI nique to eliminate leakage from Class 1 control rod drive bottom indicates that the applicability is limited to Division 1 of Section XI.7 Class 1. Case is discussed in 27. The subject and numerical index 2. This number denotes specifically N-733 Provides for use of a mechanical connection modifica. NPS 2 (DN50) and smaller piping. If an interpretation contains two or more ques- wall thinning and roll-band length. This Case is discussed in 27. (2) ASME Stamping. This Qualifications (WPQ) between Owners. utilizing committees for Sections I through XI. for the representative books. Calibration Standards. performance demonstration.14 and in Chapter 45. that loose-leaf form and usually issued as part of the addenda issues structural integrity of a cracked or leaking socket weld in Class 1. earlier volumes were not indexed by the tion fatigue. and Authorized Inspection Agency 4410 and IWA-4611 for reducing a defect to an acceptable size. issued in 1977. prototype joint performance test. In the numbering. for example— Work shall be performed in accordance with the specified require. which denotes that it supersedes the interpretation of N-730 Provides for use of a mechanical roll expansion tech. ing. This Case is discussed in 27. Work shall be performed in accor. 12 and subsequent volumes issued in N-666 Provides. This Case is (1) Component Classification and Exemptions discussed in 27. N-557-1 Provides criteria for in-place dry annealing of a PWR except to SA-302 Grade B material. and Personnel face of Class 1.12. design. Certification.12. This pro. The water-backed applications. Section XI interpretations are numbered con- erosion. (Consult the ASME volumes of of cracking. was the first formal publication. was the last adds conditions for acceptance) bound volume. installation. (Regulatory Guide 1. resulting from vibra. or pitting may have wall thick. (welding) procedure. the previous issue. and 27. began with vol. but some users— Hartford Steam Boiler. The double digits in the middle indicate the year that the interpre- dance with the specified requirements. cation to later editions and addenda. 12. prepared indexes for their own use. Subject headings: Mechanical connection assemblies are permitted only on nozzles on which there are substantially no piping reactions. 2 and 3 piping. evaluation. head penetrations in BWRs. Risk-Informed Safety Classifications of Case N-660. ments.147 provides conditions for 27.2–B.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.

to pressure vessels only. XI-1-98-77 The NPS 4 size limitation for branch pipe connec- structed and installed before Section III had rules for construction tion welds in Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-J of those supports. Documentation of the item must be provided in accordance with side the scope of Section XI examination requirements. Many of the early inquiries concerned components that were XI-1-86-21R The rules of Section XI do not apply to mainte- not part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary. not to storage tanks. Section included in the scope of Section XI inspection. XI-1-04-27 Regarding Table IWB-2500-1 Examination XI-1-83-71R Section XI does not address the induction heat Category B-N-2. and examination of the repair cavity do not apply to repair activi- XI-80-05 At the valve that determines the boundary between ties performed in accordance with the requirements of the two system Classes (Class 1 to Class 2. to ASME Class 2 or 3. XI-1-83-52 Section XI rules do apply to replacement of instru. valves. tion of the Construction Code specified by the Owner. such as manway pad welds. pack- reactor coolant pressure boundary and associated Class 2 and ing. Classification is determined by the Construction XI-79-14 It is the intent of Section XI to exempt examination Code or Owner’s specification. Category C-F. and XI-1-83-76 Class 1 pressure-retaining bolting in components Authorized Inspection Agency that are not selected for examination do not need to be examined. The the Owner to determine which. it may then be exempted XI-1-79-01 (1) It is not the intent of Section XI to require an from specific examination and repair/replacement activities by organization to have an ASME Certificate of Authorization to provisions of IWA-4700. of the system. Another category of exclusions that required clarification is required. including those supports that were con. Quality N-544 addresses part of this problem. such as replacement Addenda removed the exemption from examination of some Class valve disks in valves that do not perform a safety function in the 2 systems. and temperature (7) Repairs do not exempt high-pressure safety injection systems. and fittings applies to the installation of those items. Section XI exemption rules may NB-5222(a) apply only to Class 1 components. It is up to structed to a Code or Standard other than Subsection NF.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 351 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 351 (5) Flaw Evaluation XI-1-86-05 Section XI Class 2 examination exemptions (6) Pressure Tests (IWC-1220) based on size. Section XI does not apply when system XI-1-83-26R The NPS 1 exemption (IWA-7400) of replacement safety criteria permit the components to be a non-nuclear safety piping. XI-80-02 It is not the intent of Section XI to apply the require. material supplier. replacement piping subassembly must be in accordance with Section III. but states that IWB or IWC requirements apply. As part of the ISI sampling program development. and pump fly. attachment welds of pipe whip restraints. XI-1-01-06 The test and examination requirements of ment tubing or piping. Owner’s Report Forms. diameter and smaller is rarely an ASME Certificate Holder or Code Stampholder. The exception is that. welded pipe (pipe welded without addition of filler metal) are out.1 Component Classification and Exemptions fall within that system. 2.15 for more information. closed position. with Section III. XI-1-83-30 Subsection IWF applies to all Class 1. and seals where maintenance operations do not involve weld- Class 3 systems. and XI recognizes that the plant Owner is responsible for “Code” repair/replacement activities when it is classified by the Owner as work done on the plant site. is responsible for determining which components B. so consequently it did not address such items as ing or metal removal. However. The Section XI nance operations such as the removal and reinstallation of bolting. it is required by the edi- so forth (1989 edition). or material manufac- longitudinal welds in Class 2 pipe fittings. to pipe whip XI-1-95-25 The requirements of IWB-4000 for defect removal restraints. Code Case B. diesel fuel piping systems.2 ASME Stamping. However. boundary. applies to the branch pipe size. IWB-1220. systems to be excluded from the calculation of makeup capacity. a system leakage test at nominal operating pressure wheels. or 3. See 28. Retest requirements of Subsections IWP and IWV comprised uninspected items that were part of the pressure may also apply. Questions in this category usually arise because the Owner is XI-1-83-78 Instrument tubing of 1 in. Assurance. IWA-7400. IWC-1220. and XI-1-98-56 IWE-1220(d) exempts piping penetrating contain- MC component supports. operating pressure. ment. ASME Code Class 1.” It is the responsibility of the Owner to classify items XI-1-83-72 For piping originally constructed in accordance such as the Core Shroud. If. Section XI does not define “Core Support stress improvement (IHSI) process. The Owner. However. and procure replacement items. the Owner’s Quality Assurance Program (which is in accordance . class. ments of Subsection IWF. of supports of Class 2 piping and components that are exempt XI-1-92-45 IWB-1220(a) intends that emergency core–cooling from examination.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. following the closing hydrogen recombiners. however. only the installation welds can be performed in accordance with Section XI. Structure. 2. Component Supports. prevail. the XI-1-83-80R This interpretation concerns the examination of replacement manufacturer. and the replacement of gaskets. and so forth). testing. 3. hydrogen recombiners are still exempted. XI-1-89-51 Class 2 vessel examination Category C-A applies some categories were not included. XI-1-92-27 Section XI does not provide rules for the classifica- XI-78-18 Revisions to IWC-1220 in the Summer 1978 tion of specific items within components. ports apply to supports (mostly those of piping) that were con. Certification. turer must have the appropriate ASME Certificate of Longitudinal welds in SA-403 fittings made from autogenous Authorization or Quality System Certificate (Materials). and lifting lug welds. not Section XI. Specification. intent of Section XI that the Class of the pipe determines the XI-1-95-56 For components that have been voluntarily upgraded Class of the pipe to valve weld. in the Owner’s Design actual meaning is that Section XI rules for examination of sup. Committee explained repeatedly that its scope was limited to the the tightening of fasteners. however. it is the Construction Code or Section III.

to exempt the nozzle–safe-end weld and safe-end–cap weld (or XI-1-04-35 The Manufacturer’s Data Report must be attached nozzle–cap weld) associated with capped control rod–drive to a Form NIS-2 covering subsequent installations of items that hydraulic-return nozzles in BWR vessels from the examinations have been installed previously. or replacements of Code-Stamped wise not required. threads in the base material. (2) Similarly. XI-79-11 Preservice examination of Class 3 supports must be XI-1-92-07 The intent of Appendix II is that the conducted following initiation of hot functional or power ascen- Manufacturer’s Data Report be attached to the NIS-2 Form only sion tests. another location. Form NIS-2. . pieces of an existing item. The test method shall be listed. but supported components are not required to be under for a new replacement item. In the case of the reactor the Owner. involving snub- but the Owner must perform the repair in accordance with a repair bers and pressure relief valves rotated from stock for the purpose program as required by IWA-4000. installations.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.3 Examination Program ties may have such requirements. The (2) IWA-1400(n) does not address specific QA program require- requirements of the edition of the Owner-specified Construction ments such as Appendix B or NQA-1 for control of replacement Code will determine whether the supplier of the items must hold parts/component that must be stored prior to installation. nor does it require such bolting to be cov. vessel. the services of an ANII are like- forming repairs. heat exchangers. specified in Examination Categories B-F or B-J. See Chapter 27. B. Section 27. requires (line zles in BWR vessels may not be exempted from the examinations item 9) that the Owner attach Manufacturer’s Data Report Forms specified in Examination Category B-D. Section 27. (2) It is the intent of XI-1-04-37 (1) IWA-7210(b) permits use of N. They are not considered to the NIS-2. See Chapter 27. XI-79-12 The intent of Section XI is that there are no require- XI-1-98-05 Section XI does not require an Authorized Nuclear ments for examination of manway-to-vessel welds. Examination Category B-G-1 still requires examina- ments in accordance with Subsection IWL.or NPT- Section XI that replacement reactor vessel studs. vessel flange. the examinations must be performed following the vessel XI-1-86-07 It is not permissible to apply the Section XI flaw hydrostatic test. only organiza.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 352 352 • Chapter 26 with regulatory authority requirements). volumetric examination is required for the ligaments tions holding appropriate ASME Certificates of Authorization between threaded stud holes. In the case of ered by a Code N-2 Data Report. piping. a surface examination con- required for welded repairs to the pressure-retaining boundary ducted in the shop on the internal cast surfaces of pumps and valves when repairs are performed in accordance with the original satisfies the Section XI requirement for a visual examination.) vessels. or welds tested need not be listed. but no examination is required for may certify the work. stamped replacement items that have previously been in service at ers be treated as materials rather than parts when they are manu. an NIS-2 Form is not required. Inservice Inspector to have a National Board C (concrete) XI-79-16 When bushings are present in stud holes in the reactor endorsement to perform inservice inspections of concrete contain. Construction Code. nuts. not when repairing or replacing pressure. of Examination Category B-G-1 that only visual examination is XI-1-83-10 For repairs or modification of a component after it required for flange ligaments between threaded stud holes and is N-stamped but before its installation is completed. and C-E-1 to require examination of integrally welded attach- XI-1-04-12 IWA-6220 does require that an abstract of pressure ments that are not used for support or restraint of Class 1 and 2 tests on Form NIS-1 be submitted as part of IWA-6230’s components. threads in base material. Section III examination records may be used as Section XI pre- XI-1-86-06 Section XI does not require NPT-stamping on bolt. it is not the intent of Section XI item to the installation location.1 and inspec. an ASME Certificate of Authorization or Quality System (3) IWA-2110(h) does not require ANII approval of Owner’s Certificate (Materials). the requirements for visual examination Summary Report. 1 program for replacement parts/components. pumps. tion of both the bushings and the ligaments between stud holes. the rules of threads in base material on pressurizers. XI-78-20 (1) It is the intent of Examination Category B-G-1 tion by an Authorized Inspector was not required.4. and valves. it does not require him to witness all tests. However. XI-1-83-13 Services of an Authorized Inspection Agency are XI-79-05 It is the intent of Section XI that Manufacturer’s required for nonwelded repairs as well as repairs by welding. as determined by generators. where XI-1-81-11R Section XI does not require an organization per. used are the same as those specified in Section XI.3 XI-78-06 Section XI does not address examination of lifting for additional information. However. corrective action performed under Owner’s Appendix B or NQA- tional information. for the term “bolting” to be a generic term that includes bolts. XI-1-98-25 While IWA-2110 requires the Inspector to verify all XI-80-03 It is not the intent of Examination Categories B-K-1 pressure testing. valves. vessels. and wash.7. the Section III examination records acceptance standards to NPT-stamped shop-fabricated piping must be in a form consistent with the requirements of IWA-6000. state or local authori. XI-1-79-20 Section XI does not require an Owner performing a XI-1-07-06 When using Code Cases N-508 through N-508-3 repair weld on an N-stamped valve to have an ASME N-Certificate. lugs on the reactor vessel closure head or elsewhere. without a IWA-4000 repair replacement activity. studs. nuts. service examination records provided the examination methods ing ordered as spares. factured to material specifications permitted by Section III.1 for addi. of testing. (2) It is the intent work. even if the Code was ANSI B31. the services of an ANII are not required. XI-80-11 (1) Capped control rod–drive hydraulic-return noz- XI-1-04-28 Mandatory Appendix II. XI-82-03 Services of an Authorized Inspection Agency are XI-78-07 For preservice examination. steam either Section III or Section XI may be applied. including information that permits traceability of the analogous to manways. When the rules of Section III are used. In addition. it is permis. and sible (but not required) to apply the NA-stamp to the installation flange ligaments between threaded stud holes. bushings. but individual during the pressure tests of IWB-5000 and IWC-5000 apply. components to have an ASME NA-Certificate of Authorization or National Board NR-Certification. XI-1-83-02 In replacement of NPT-stamped parts. washers. (Bolting is material. Also. welds before the N-5 Data Report is completed. pumps.

reference points at intervals along the weld length. repair. cumulative inlet nor outlet pipe cross-sectional area exceeds the XI-1-89-63 IWB-2200 does not require the preservice volumet. tion based on the components selected for examination. components are exempt. XI-1-92-20 Tension-type supports. Note (1). the Class 2 tion for loose or missing parts and debris as required by size exemption of IWC-1221(a) for NPS 4 and smaller does not IWA2213. IWC1200 and IWD-1200 is to exempt Class 2 and Class 3 ves- tions. nents consists of specified examinations of bolting. nominal cross-sectional area of the designated NPS size. inspection. the additional examinations of IWF-2430 retaining welds that are above and below the flange surface that of adjacent component supports are required even if the adjacent supports the control rod–drive mechanism. However. (See also is not acceptable. Category B-J. and Class 2 XI-1-98-32 Insulation must be removed for VT-3 examinations Category C-C. XI-1-92-33 The acceptance standard for containment examina- ally does not need to examine supports of components that are tion Category E-Q. nation for transverse reflectors in austenitic piping welds.50 is limited to nozzle safe-end dis. the intent of XI-1-89-02 When Section V is used for inservice examina. (But see Interpretation nal wall-thickness. such as variable and con- XI-82-01 When performing nozzle examinations per stant springs and rods that carry the weight of the component.3. XI-1-83-39 A weld between a P-No.) affected area.10 XI-1-86-17 When corrective measures are required following for peripheral control rod–drive housing welds includes pressure- support examinations. either carries the weight of the component or serves as a structural tion or service induced. See 28. unless they are included in the of components not normally removed during refueling outages. ments. vessel imposed by Category B-N-1. may extend from the surface of the insulation provided the support tions apply regardless of whether the flaw is considered fabrica. fall Examination Category B-D. or volumetric examination during an interval. Examination Category B-D. if the weld has not been selected for inservice under Category B-F item B5. forged integral attachments. it is not intended XI-1-86-08 For Class 1 nozzles. to exempt them from the visual examination of the Category B-P the nozzle inner radius examination applies even for integrally (during the pressure test). require examination of only integrally welded of integral attachments to the pressure boundary of Class 3 sup- attachments that meet the size requirements. Item B14. (Note that in Interpretation XI-1-83-39.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 353 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 353 XI-81-02 Section III radiographic examination results may be of Table IWB-2500-1. and D-C is to address only integrally welded attach. XI-1-92-05 (1) The intent of Class 3 examination Categories Table IWB-2500-1 Category B-G-1 and B-G-2 examinations are D-A. Examination Category B-O. and valves and their connections provided neither the be used as is used for Section XI. It does not limit the location or extent of the XI1-86-17. dissimilar metal welds not selected by Category B-F. the record systems may be acceptable.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. examination XI-1-92-29 IWF-1300(e) intent is that the mechanical connec- of manway installation welds is not required. pumps. are not required piping systems that operate at a pressure greater than 275 psig and for spaces below the core that were made accessible by the removal a temperature greater than 200°F. the pipe-to-clamp interface is excluded. restraint in compression. 3 material is XI-1-92-40 While IWB-1220(a) exempts some Class 1 compo- not a dissimilar metal weld. But see Code Case N-619. Interpretations XI-1-92-22 and XI-1-92-29. IWE-3519. XI-1-98-42 Preservice examination of a repaired Class 2 weld XI-1-92-13 (1) Examination of Class 1 piping safe-end welds is not required. XI-1-98-12 Starting with the 1986 Edition. XI-1-95-28 VT-3 examinations for spaces below the reactor core XI-1-86-67 Section XI does not require examination of Class 3 imposed by Categories B-N-1 Note (1). Such examination would the reactor core.) (2) The dissimilar metal weld selected by Note 1(c) [IWC-2200(b)(1)]. to follow. 2 does not require disassembly of portions of the reactor vessel sembly of pump castings and valve bodies for preservice VT-3 internals of a BWR just to provide access for examinations below visual examinations of internal surfaces. the intent is that the same edition and addenda of Section V sels. (Definitive but analysis substantiates its integrity for continued service.) XI-1-83-04 For inservice volumetric examination of Class 2 XI-1-92-22 The examination boundary of a nonintegral support systems. or transient loads. ric examination of steam generator tubing to be performed after XI-1-98-22 For Class 1 pumps and valves not disassembled for the Section III hydrostatic test. be satisfied by the Section III fabrication requirements.3 material is not a dissimilar conducted only after completion of the Section III hydrostatic test metal weld. within the requirements of IWA-1300(e) in such a way that insu- ume of two nozzles instead of 100% of the volume of one nozzle lation removal is not required under the ISI program. XI-1-92-43 Class 1.28 for more information. cast nozzles. similar metal welds. a XI-1-98-50 Preservice examination of a Class 2 vessel can be weld between a P-No. includes examina- XI-1-86-43R Unlike the Class 1 size exemption. nents from volumetric and surface examination. 1 and P-No. seismic loads. not required. in-vessel items other than core support struc- exempt components connected by exempt piping. and B-N-2. even though the support may also be XI-1-83-11 Examination of manways in Class 1 and 2 compo. D-B. (2) Class 1 Categories B-H and B-K-1. face with the clamp. . unless the com.) requirements of IWF-2430 for additional examinations are not XI-1-95-27 VT-3 examinations for spaces within the reactor intended to apply. not of the cast or port Article IWF examinations. XI-1-92-46 Core support structure examination Category B-N- XI-1-86-20 It is not the intent of IWB-2200 to require disas. designed to control thermal loads. XI-1-95-05 IWA-2610 weld reference system requirements XI-1-86-30R When an inservice examination of a component were not intended to require the physical marking of piping with support reveals an unacceptable condition described in IWF-3410(a). one usu. tion for a pipe clamp includes the bolting or pins and their inter- XI-1-83-12R2 Component supports are selected for examina. ponent itself is NPS 4 or smaller. tures are not included. 1 and P-No. the requirements of IWC-2430 for additional examina. are limited to the remaining used to satisfy the Section XI requirements for preservice exami. permits 10% reduction in nomi- exempt or not selected in the program. examination and test categories of Table IWD-2500-1. maintenance. examining 50% of the required vol.

of integrally welded reactor vessel attachments. (2) IWF-2500 and Code Case N-491 do not require measure.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. apply to calibration blocks for UT acceptance standard for Examination Category C-B. B. other than sup. XI-1-98-60 Insulation must be removed for VT-3 examinations and Personnel Qualification of nonintegral (mechanical) attachments to the pressure boundary. ined when the head-to-flange connection is disassembled and the XI-1-92-09 Appendix VIII. or examination requirements of a weld connecting a steam genera- ing guides and stops. thick or less in valve bodies and pump ferritic steel but does not address austenitic steel. does not require examination of internal ment of component support “as-built” dimensions such as fillet pressure-retaining parts that are not part of the valve body. the welds in item B9. and the examination of component support tor primary nozzle directly to a reactor coolant pump housing. XI-79-13 A data recording system that records ultrasonic data XI-1-98-75 Examination Category B-G-1 item B6. XI-1-89-05 In Appendix III. weld leg sizes. or socket welds in XI-1-92-52 IWA-5244 provides alternatives to VT-2 visual reactor coolant system Class 1 piping subject to examination equal examination for detection of leakage from buried pipes during 25% of the total number of circumferential butt.30 does not at discrete intervals with the required minimum overlap satisfies require removal of reactor vessel closure studs for volumetric and the Appendix I (Summer 1975 Addenda) I-6310(a) requirement surface examination. in fact. steam-generator tubing eddy current calibration standards. XI-77-03 In the application of Appendix I. IWA-2300 VT-1. which is the piping UT calibration blocks. base-plate anchor-to-wall gap tolerances. and VT-3 visual examinations are not considered to be separate XI-1-04-29 In Figure IWB-2500-12 dimension DS defines the NDE methods. cation by performance demonstration for ultrasonic examination XI-1-04-21 (1) IWB-2200(a) does require that preservice exami. IWC-3511. Note (2). population be examined during each inspection interval.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 354 354 • Chapter 26 XI-1-98-58 (1) IWF-2500 and Code Case N-491 require the XI-1-04-43 Section XI does not address an examination category examination of component support clearances only when examin. smallest acceptable flaws for the piping thickness indicated in (4) IWA-1400(b) requires that all piping welds be designed and Table IWB-3514-1. as stat- examinations. it (2) Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-J does require does not specify methods for producing the specimens. however. XI-1-89-12 Appendix III rules. including III-3400 rules for XI-1-01-38 In the 1989 Edition. VIII-3100 does not require qualifi- studs remain in place.22 may be exempted. However. the term “period of XI-1-01-12 Examination Category B-M-2 item B12.50 does extended use” refers to a plant outage. only to the extent made practicable by that other purpose. Also. branch. it XI-78-21 IWA-1400(m) does not require Owners to retain does not require 25% of each item number in the Table. and then only once per inspection equal to or greater than 50% of DAC. branch. al is clad. not require disassembly of Class 1 valve internal parts for VT-3 XI-1-89-11 (3) Appendix III. (When the component materi- tural restraint in compression. XI-1-07-09 Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-M-2. the calibration block material shall also be clad. that the number of circumferential butt. 2002 Addenda provides acceptance criteria for austenitic steels. (b) or (c).4 NDE: Techniques. settings only when examining spring and constant load supports. III-3310. interval. Calibration Standards. . examination is required only holes in piping UT calibration blocks apply to calibration blocks when a valve is disassembled for some other purpose. diameter of the stud. (3) Table IWC-2500-1 Examination Categories C-F-1 and C-F. nations extend to include essentially 100% of Class 1 piping welds XI-1-92-49 While Appendix VIII requires the use of thermal except for those welds exempted by IWB-1220(a). arranged to allow access to meet the examination requirements of XI-1-95-38 For personnel qualification. XI-1-95-35 (1) There is no requirement stating that the exami- 2 require only those welds selected for inservice inspection to be nation technique must be capable of detecting and sizing the included in preservice inspection. and other installation tolerances. item B12. and then for 12 V-path examinations. Section XI. Footnote (2) was to require reexamination of the same welds from job to job. clad the ultrasonic calibration block even when examination is ports carrying the weight of the component or serving as a struc. VT-2. and (2) include such full-penetration vessel nozzle XI-77-16 Level 1 NDE personnel shall not independently eval- to nozzle extension welds in Examination Category C-B surface uate or accept the results of a nondestructive examination. XI-1-98-70 (1) Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-J. fatigue cracks for performance demonstration test specimens. Section XI did not intend to require those test per- welds in reactor coolant system Class 1 piping except those exempted sonnel to have VT-2 examination qualification. VII. or socket pressure tests.) The XI-1-98-67 Starting with the 1986 Edition. performed from the unclad surface. it is necessary to for Class 3 support IWF-1300(e) examinations. not those of item B6. examination. the casings. it was the intent to effect of cladding is too significant and variable among materials include (1) Class 2 vessel nozzle to nozzle extension welds in and ultrasonic techniques to permit the use of calibration block Examination Category C-H system pressure tests with VT-2 visual design alternatives such as deletion of cladding. the search unit scan overlap and XI-1-04-18 Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category B-G-1 technique requirements of Appendix III apply. XI-78-15 Section XI does not specify machining tolerances on Footnote (1) requires that 25 % of the total non-exempt piping weld perpendicularity of notches in ultrasonic calibration blocks. VII-4240 annual supplemental training. Section XI by IWB-1220. addresses examination of welds 2 in. ed in IWA-2300(f). lacks requirements for qualification of those test personnel. (The (2) The intent of Table IWB-2500-1 Examination Category eddy current test service organization can carry the standards B-J.) each inspection interval only to the extent practical. XI-1-89-13 For piping UT. Appendix I.50. to determine whether Table IWB-2500-1 XI-1-95-40 A classroom setting is not required for Appendix Examination Category B-G-1 or B-G-2 applies.50 does not require that reactor vessel bushings be exam. examination is required only when a stud is for recording all ultrasonic reflectors that produce a response removed for some other reason. III-3230(d) rules for side-drilled examination of internal surfaces.

XI-1-89-16 Section XI acceptance standards apply to indica- ing or experience prior to certification or recertification is not tions detected during a Section XI examination.5 Flaw Evaluation until requirements are provided in Appendix VIII. but no requirements are provided. testing. uated to determine disposition of the indication. and viewing Section V. VT-2 personnel to verify the operability of a leakage collection the presence or absence of a gap between a component and its sup- system. be See 27.40) be performed per meter. not to all piping weld seams. that Section XI repair/replacement program to be qualified per IWA- experience be in nuclear applications does not imply that it is 2300. rules for piping UT angle-beam. visual examinations have given rise to several inquiries. However. same employer to ANSI/ASNT CP-189. and experience requirements of the level of certification XI-1-95-35 (2) Section XI does not permit alternative flaw accep- being sought prior to initial certification or certification to a higher tance standards based on the use of plant-specific considerations.1 for more information. may delegate to individuals having specific sub- XI-1-98-04 Neither IWA-1400 nor IWA-6340 require that eddy ject matter expertise for specialized training during a course of current data storage units be maintained as an Owner’s record.) or linear surface flaws detected by surface examinations the same as smaller wire satisfies the lighting requirement of IWA-2211(b). indications are outside the Section XI examination volumes or tified to the same level by a new employer or recertified by the surfaces. if the current (more severe) loadings . not the Construction Code. XI-1-04-05 (1) The intent of IWA-2310 is that additional train. NPT-stamped Class 1 replacement part by welding. and who met the Basic examina. they mean one or the other—not both. However. the Stress Report. may be those welds for which Table IWB-2500-1 requires examination. the evaluation must consider the new or mined and recorded in the inspection report of a VT-3 (IWA-2213) revised loadings. If acceptance standards are not specified in Section XI. It in operation of automated data acquisition or remote examination allows either. XI-1-01-39 Appendix VIII performance demonstration is XI-1-07-14 IWA-2213 does not require measurement of installa- required for examination of welds in austenitic piping containing tion tolerances at a bolted connection as part of a VT-3 examination.001 in. and 60 deg. than ultrasonic. what was documented originally in the Design Specifications or XI-1-04-13 IWF-2500 requires that relevant conditions be deter. technique for reflectors transverse to the weld seams. when a relevant condition is not observed. ble) are required. The NDE XI-1-04-34 Appendix I Supplement 9 does require that two UT specified in NB-5410 may be performed prior to the leakage test. In any case. XI-1-01-52 IWA-2216 requirements remote visual examination XI-1-89-11 (1) When Table IWB-2500-1. are not considered NDE personnel and do not of presentation time that an NDE Instructor. level. angle beams having nominal angles of 45 deg. used when conducting vessel examinations from the outside XI-1-01-07. Because their depth is not Note: Ability to resolve a 1 mil wire has been imposed by NRC as known. but who are not responsible for the evalua. VII-4120. recertified without retaking the Basic examination. structural weld inlay. an NDE Level III initially certi.11. internal components. (2) The Owner is responsible for determining the criteria port need not be recorded. equipment per instructions from a qualified NDE examiner be XI-1-98-64 Code Case N-416-1 permits a system leakage test qualified and certified as NDE examiners when their job function in lieu of a Section XI hydrostatic test following installation of a requires no knowledge of the NDE method involved. and phys- XI-1-95-61 Personnel who obtain recorded images of vessel ical displacements. III-4430. I-2400 that ultrasonic does not require measurement of illumination levels with a light examination of threads in flange (item B6.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 355 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 355 XI-1-95-41 (1) IWA-5243 does not require certified Level II examination. state that volumetric or surface examinations (as applica- can be detected. Appendix III. (b)(1) does not XI-1-04-31 IWA-2310 does not require that personnel involved require both shear wave and longitudinal wave examinations. provided relevant conditions B-K-1. instruction. starting in the 2003 Addenda. XI-1-01-33 Illumination levels cited in IWA-2210 for diameter of from the inside diameter on unclad surfaces. XI-1-04-22 IWA-2310 and IWA-2314 do not limit the amount tion of the images. XI-78-02 The intent of IWB-3514 is to characterize multiple XI-1-01-51 Lighting sufficient to resolve a 1 mil (0. access. IWA-4511 pro- restricted to Section XI applications.3. It requires a combination of lighting. If the Owner determines that requirements when recertification to the same level is being the current loadings for the evaluated item are more severe than sought under a later edition of ANSI/ASNT CP-189.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. ratio listed. applies to tion requirements of ASNT SNT-TC-1A 1984 Edition. for methods other need to be qualified according to IWA-2300. required to verify parameters such as clearances. 12 V-path fied per IWA-2300 1989 Edition. an analytical evaluation for acceptance the requirements of the governing Edition and Addenda of must be in accordance with IWB-3600. tance limits of IWB-3500. Section XI apply. (2) XI-1-04-01 Under IWA-2323. if they were detected ultrasonically. Intent is that examinations be performed in accordance with Appendix III B. Also. those in the item’s Construction Code or Section III shall be eval- (2) IWA-2310 does require that a candidate meet all training. vides an option to use IWA-2300. nation. settings. angle sufficient for personnel to resolve the lower case characters XI-1-07-12 IWA-4520 does not require personnel performing specified in Table IWA-2210-1. Construction Code nondestructive examinations as part of a XI-1-01-34 The requirement in Appendix VII. in accordance with requirements of an Edition and Addenda XI-1-83-29 For a flaw indication found to exceed the accep- of Section XI that references ANSI/ASNT CP-189. IWA-2210 XI-1-07-02 It is the intent of Appendix I. even when the required for personnel certified to SNT-TC-1A who are being cer. one should assume that they have the maximum aspect a supplement to some Section XI requirements for visual exami. dimensional measurements are not for verifying operability of the leakage collection system. XI-1-95-01 IWA-4130 and IWA-4150 require that a repair or (3) Moreover. it is not the intent of IWA-2310 that a candidate replacement be evaluated to determine if Construction Code meet all the ANSI/ASNT CP-189 initial training and experience design requirements are satisfied. XI-1-83-32 Depth of surface flaws excludes cladding thickness. Categories B-H and do not require use of color camera. However. XI-1-98-18 Appendix III Supplement 4 par.

the IWA-4400(b) pressure test exemption applies. it is not an alternative to the requirements of repair/replacement activities. one is allowed to use the actual coolant is the required pressurizing medium. there is no “S” dimension defined required for repairs or replacement installations performed under between Flaw Plane #1 and Flaw Plane #2. reactor accordance with Appendix H. XI-1-92-19 Corrective measures required by IWA-5250(a) do sure in lieu of hydrostatic pressure tests. Also. systems.) B. test following replacement of nuts. and . (IWC-5222 or IWD-5223) may not be achieved in upper eleva- XI-1-04-44 For preservice inspection. as the “a” dimension. mation. However. the following corrective action process is XI-77-07 The pressure test exemption for open-ended portions acceptable under IWA-5250: of non-closed Class 3 systems includes exemption from the visual examination requirements.3. leakage test. The reader should be aware that IWC-5210(b) or IWD-5210(b). IWA-3300(d) XI-1-83-63R The system pressure test requirements of defines “r” as the mean radius of the tube. one is not allowed to use hydrostatic tests are required at or near the end of a 10 yr.. bolts. design reevaluation. inspec- actual material properties for yield strength and ultimate strength tion interval during a coincident refueling outage. provided the of a seating surface of a raised-face flange. This is intentional.6 Pressure Tests XI-1-92-18 IWA-5211(e) is a test description. either water or air may be used in steam systems. ments of the original Construction Code.11. XI-1-86-35 A cover welded over an NPS 1 or smaller opening cedures and acceptance standards are not better integrated. specific considerations is not acceptable. This is more a reflection of the conser. not be considered a penetration of the pressure-retaining boundary. (a) removal of the flaw. This is essentially a reiteration of Interpretation XI-83-63R and ing the sizes indicated in Table IWB-3514-1 may be evaluated in others. flaws exceed. system functional test. XI-1-98-11 This addresses a series of questions regarding the XI-1-83-58 For a repair or installation weld connecting NPS 1 requirements of IWA-3300 for determining dimensions of flaws. for the definition of Sm. but if the system material properties for yield strength and ultimate strength for the fluid is steam. Code Case N-416 essentially permits a leak-test at operating pres. (2) When evaluating ferritic piping in XI-1-83-25 For pressure tests of Class 1 systems. The key is that the test is required only when the replace- accordance with IWB-3600. est point in the system not exceed 106% of the required test pres- sure vessel shells when the pressurization does not exceed 20% of sure (IWA-5265). is considered to meet the IWA-4400(b) size exemption for pres- Section XI does not require inspection techniques capable of sure testing of repairs. per Figure IWA-3330-1. (4) In Figure IWA-3350-1. See Section 27. IWC-3112(b). the intent is that the pressure at the low- structural discontinuities at the intersection of nozzles and pres. (1) For flaws detected in steam generator tubing.3. ment results from a Section XI program requirement. steam may be used. if a weld radiograph tions of the system. XI-1-86-53 It was asked if IWA-5211 required a reactor to be ed in Table IWB-3514-1. Flaw #1 and Flaw #2 do not overlap.1 and 28. Chapter 27 of this book contains a XI-1-92-31 When through-wall leakage is found during a sys- very extensive and useful discussion in Section 27.11. See reader should also review the interpretations on repairs (see 28. XI-1-89-66 Regarding static head consideration during a XI-1-04-03 The criteria of IWB-3613(a) may be applied to hydrostatic pressure test. System ing in accordance with Appendix C.4.1 of Chapter 27 for more infor- Plane #2 and Flaw Plane #3. it must receive associated with a Section XI activity. which follows. they are minimum pressurization pressures. plant start-up following each reactor refueling outage. documents indications that are acceptable per NB-2500/NB-5300. system leak-tests are required before XI-1-95-49 (1) When evaluating austenitic stainless steel pip. That condition should digitally-enhanced radiographs satisfy the examination require.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. IWA-5214(e) apply only to disassembly and reassembly of (2) Note (4) to Table IWC-3510-1 specifies that Y ⫽ S/a. XI-01-01 (1) It is a weakness of Section XI that inspection pro. a branch connection or wel- applicable to a Class 1 component installed in a Class 2 system.7 of this Appendix). For pressure tests of Class 2 definition of Sm. Section XI does not require the same pressure tests as all other portions of that system.28 for more information. Section B. NDE systems to find flaws that affect system safety.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 356 356 • Chapter 26 are discovered in the course of a routine design review that is not since the component is part of a Class 2 system. in a noncritical state when pressure tests are performed. XI-1-92-04 The intent of IWA-5211 is to permit a system the indications are acceptable even if they do not meet the accep. use 2a replacement. Core crit- vatism of the acceptance standard tables than on the capability of icality during pressure testing is not addressed by Section XI. XI-1-89-08 Section XI (IWA-5214) does not require a pressure (2) Use of alternative acceptance standards based on plant. The only to leakage discovered during a Section XI pressure test. or system inservice test. or between Flaw Section XI.g. XI-78-01 Per IWB-5210. XI-1-83-66 The Construction Code hydrostatic test is not (3) In Figure IWA-3360-1. pneumatic test for Class 2 and 3 components in lieu of a system tance standards of IWB-3000. and XI-1-89-31 The intent of Section XI is that a hydrostatic pressure IWC-3121(b) apply to components with flaws observed on test need not be performed for a weld repair across the entire width digitally-enhanced original construction radiographs. not a require- Many inquiries concern hydrostatic pressure testing following ment. detecting and sizing the smallest acceptable piping flaws indicat. dolet) as according to Section XI and the Construction Code. (But see Interpretation XI-1-92-18. there are many not apply to leakage identified during normal plant operation— exceptions to leak-tests after repair/replacement activities. or studs on components. tem pressure test. range tolerances. Also. IWB-3131(b). piping and associated valves to larger piping or components. XI-1-04-02 IWB-3112(b). This is permitted by IWB-3112(b). XI-77-18 Class 1 system pressure test requirements are not (b) installation of a closure device (e. XI-1-86-32 Hydrostatic test pressurization factors do not have The separation can be defined as the greater of 2d1 and 2d2. even though the specified test pressure the Design Pressure. To mechanical joints occurring in the course of a Section XI repair or determine if the flaw is classified as a surface flaw.

2. See 27. not VT-1. any time prior to startup at or near the end of the interval. all Class 1 XI-1-95-54 The test pressure for a system leakage test may be piping. need not be qualified to perform VT-2 visual examinations. N-498-1 and N-498-2 were under the rules of Section XI for Class 1 vessels. the requirements of Table IWA-2210-1 apply examination may be employed if it is documented in the Owner’s to the surrounding area rather than to the actual component. after reweld. items were not subject to pressurization during a system functional or inservice test. it is not required when only the bolting is replaced. May Section XI UT be sub- al examination. Over time.3 of Chapter 27 for more information. when conducting a See Section 27. Examination Category B-G-1.. N-498-4 at the end of ten-year testing of Class 1 extended bound- aries need not follow a refueling outage. XI-98. Repairs must be subjected Retaining Partial Penetration Welds in Vessels.73 This addresses several aspects of requirements for XI-1-95-34 A leakage test in accordance with IWE-5221 is the pressure testing NPT-stamped replacement parts and their welds. The rules of either Section III Class 2 and 3 components that are submerged during normal or Section XI. it may be performed at See Section 27.3. vessel by installation of additional penetrations may be conducted XI-1-98-38 Code Cases N-498. as determined by the Owner.1 of XI-1-98-16 Table IWB-2500-1. formed using the rules of Section III. the Section XI repair/replacement activity rules convenient for a (1) IWA-2210(c) clearly permits remote examination as an alter. See 28.g. (3) When replacing a valve bonnet or body that is installed by XI-1-04-16 The test required by Code Cases N-498 through mechanical joints. XI-1-01-04 Test personnel performing a flow test in lieu of sys- ing of the primary reactor containment following steam-generator tem hydrostatic test on open-ended portions of discharge lines replacement). XI-1-01-37 IWA-5214(e) does not require pressurization of ations that do not elicit Section XI pressure test requirements of Class 2 replacement items installed by mechanical means if the either IWA-5214(e) or IWA-4710(c). XI-1-98-03 (1) This addresses the “gray area” of jurisdiction XI-1-07-15 Section XI does not address pressure testing of between Section III and Section XI. XI-1-04-19 The intent of IWB-5220 is that. system.11. However. When they either with or without disassembly of the connection. ered a Section XI repair (even when it is part of a valve servicing . ifications to the containment pressure boundary (e.3.1 for more information. XI-1-95-52 While the IWA-5214(e) pressure test is required XI-1-04-17 IWA-5250(a)(2) does require VT-3 examination when a valve bonnet or body attached by mechanical connections and evaluation of bolting that is being discarded. pressure test when a reactor vessel is opened and reclosed during Section XI does not address this issue. the plants have found pressure test. stituted for the NDE required by Section III? The Section XI (3) When examination of surrounding area (including floor areas Subcommittee cannot revise the requirements specified in another or equipment surfaces)is permitted by IWA-5241(b) and Code Section.11. Pressure fied by the provisions of Case N-236. (1) When replacing a valve disk that requires the disassembly XI-1-04-07 When there is evidence of boric acid residue on a and reassembly of the valve but no replacement of bolted bolted connection.11. repair/replacement of an N or NV-stamped Section III component prior to its installation. pressurized to reactor coolant system nominal operating pressure.2 for more information.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. IWA-4700 and IWA-5120 is required only on that portion of the sure device installed. an alternate IWA-5242(a).1 of Chapter 27 for more information. may be applied during all modes of plant operation. even if that portion of the system cannot be isolated. to a pneumatic leakage test in accordance with Appendix J of XI-1-98-51R When items are installed that do not involve any 10CFR50. is internal to the valve body or bonnet.28 for more information. when a repair is made. only Section XI pressure test requirement following repairs or mod. Repair Program and that program is filed with the enforcement and regulatory authorities at the plant site. XI-78-13 A repair weld within Section XI jurisdiction is per- tives when external surfaces are inaccessible for direct visu. except as modi- intended to include Table IWB-2500-1 Category B-E.3. IWA-5250(a)(2) requires that bolting be pressure boundary items. The plants have also recognized that the rules native to direct visual.2 were first developed. be determined by the Owner. a midcycle outage not a refueling outage. See Section 27. the rules clearly stated that they applied to for more information. or 3 mechanical connection. system leakage test at or near the end of an interval. Chapter 27 for more information. may be used for operation. in lieu of the Section XI pressure test requirements. including portions isolated during normal operation. removed and examined for evidence of degradation even if the (2) When replacing any pressure-retaining part of a valve that residue does not come into contact with any of the bolts.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 357 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 357 (c) evaluation that considers the extent of the original flaw and XI-1-98-52R When a portion of a system is subjected to a demonstrates that the structural integrity provisions of repair/replacement activity.11. no IWA-4540(c) pressure XI-1-83-28R Removal and rewelding of a seal weld is consid- test is required. (2) IWA-5241(b) and IWA-5242(a) provide additional alterna. See 28. XI-1-95-47 IWA-7530 does not require that the preservice XI-01-19 Table IWB-2500-1 Category B-P does not require a examination follow completion of the Section III hydrostatic test. Section XI repair/replacement activity rules apply. a VT-2 examination as required by Section III and the Construction Code are met with the clo. replacement pressure-retaining items.11.4. broad application. However. B. conditions revealed by examinations and tests required by a XI-1-98-06 For VT-2 visual examination for leakage during a plant’s ISI program. Note (5) (through 1994 Addenda) intended to require a VT-3 XI-79-17 Modification of a Section III Class MC containment examination per IWA-5250(a)(2). XI-1-95-48R The following are examples of maintenance oper. See 27. is replaced. Code Case N-566-2 provides an alternative.7 Repairs (2) IWA-5213(e) does not require pressure testing after replace- One of the basic inquiry subjects is determining where the ment of bolting on a Code Class 1. however.

See Section 27. such as a Design nal weld overlay without defect removal. See Section 27. the conformance was identified. Code expansion to minimize leakage. See Sections 27. Section XI did not address preventive maintenance operation of welding a larger redundant mechanical sleeving of heat exchanger tubing. XI-1-92-56 For Class 1 piping. XI-1-89-56 When metal removal from a piping weld crown is ties associated with repair and replacement of piping.1. that applicable Construction Code. upgrade stock mechanical plugging of a heat-exchanger tube meeting the size material. the original Construction moderate-energy piping. However. XI-1-89-73 Section XI does not address the application of con- (b) Obtaining a Material Certification or Certificate of trolled shot-peening as part of a repair process.qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 358 358 • Chapter 26 or maintenance activity). pumps. XI-1-89-44 The intent of IWF-2200 preservice examination is XI-1-86-59 Section XI replacement rules would not provide for that repaired or replaced supports shall be examined before the an Owner to procure a replacement valve body. and necessary to achieve a surface suitable for the required NDE. Section III shall not be replaced with a component that was XI-1-86-62 Section XI does not address the repair of reactor designed and manufactured by an organization not holding an vessel control rod–drive and instrumentation penetrations by roll appropriate ASME Certificate of Authorization.1 and Construction Code invoked Section III. problem. internal wall-thinning can be repaired by exter- require documentation of those requirements.8. See Section 27. the canopy seal over an existing nonleaking canopy seal on a Class 1 NPS 1 exemptions of IWA-7400(d) applied to mechanical sleeving component.1 of Chapter 27 for more information. required before the system’s return to service.1 of Chapter 27 for more information. requirement be not more than 25% of the sample. Compliance.ASME_Ch26_p323-360.1.3 of Report. mechanical connection—is detected in an ASME Class 1. it provides criteria for plant operators to perform activi. cation record to generate their own welding procedure specifica- See Section 27. brazing. except that XI-1-89-24 While an Owner not possessing an NA-symbol materials and primary stress levels must be consistent with the stamp is allowed to install material used for replacement. it provides crite. It provides criteria for the temporary Class 1 components. See Section 27. pliers. However.1 of Chapter (a) Procurement from material manufacturers or material sup- 27 for more information. and valves. Code 27. it more information. Section XI does not have any special rules for plant operation can continue until a scheduled outage. and purchase small products—activities usually reserved exemption. IWA-2200(b) only applies to the pre- that body. process should stop when that percentage is reached.1. 2. XI-1-89-19 Section XI IWA-4000 repair rules do apply to the XI-1-92-32 Before the 1989 addenda.2 of Chapter 27 for XI-1-89-40 When a through-wall leak—at other than a more information. the selection See 28.1 of Chapter 27 for Code is to be installed under Section XI rules as a replacement.11. a repair or systems and components apply to temporary as well as permanent replacement in accordance with IWA-4000 or IWA-7000 is repairs. XI-1-92-44 The NPS 1 exemptions of IWA-7400(d) apply to ria for plant operators to qualify material suppliers.4.and XI-1-86-47 For repairs by brazing. except that materials and primary stress levels must be for ASME Code Stampholders—without obtaining a Code Stamp. replacement (IWA-7000) as long as it does not encroach on the XI-1-86-58 When a spool piece fabricated to the Construction required wall-thickness.10.11. Interpretation XI-1-92-32 for mechanical sleeving. However. and install that body as a replacement for an N-stamped service examination. such fittings NPS 1 and smaller—activities usually reserved for the surface preparation is not considered a repair (IWA-4000) or a ASME Code Stampholders—without obtaining a Code Stamp.10. and fittings NPS 1 and smaller— interpretation lists exemptions from the following activities: activities usually reserved for ASME Code Stampholders— without obtaining a Code Stamp. XI-1-89-34 Although IWA-7210(b)(2) requires that replace. See Section 27. This interpretation illustrates an number of welds in the Note (1) categories may total more than apparent trend by Owners to apply Section XI rules to repairs the 25% of the sample required.3.8. when a component support is repaired regardless of how the non. Code Case N-544 has addressed part of this information. See Section 27. It provides criteria XI-1-89-04 The question keeps arising regarding IWB-7400(d) for plant operators to perform activities associated with repair and exemption for NPS 1-and-smaller piping.4. is still required to meet the Construction Code hydrostatic pres. However. valves.38 for more information. XI-1-92-08 IWA-4300 allows several repair organizations to (c) Obtaining third party inspection. When specific conditions are satisfied.13 of Chapter 27 for more information. fication test coupon and each use the resulting procedure qualifi- (e) Performing Section XI pressure testing.1 for more information. Section XI does not rules of Section XI. Consequently. This replacement of piping. the intent is that the beyond those associated with Section XI examinations and tests. NCA-3800. However.4. acceptance of leakage during operation from Class 3 low. See Section 27. consistent with the applicable Construction Code. tion. See Section 27. See 28. However. the 1991 addenda to indicate that the NPS 1 exemption did not pliers that furnish the material being installed if the original apply to heat-exchanger tube sleeves. of a heat-exchanger tube meeting the size exemption.2 of Chapter 27 for more information. .3.3. XI-1-89-68 A component that was originally constructed to sure test before its installation. IWA-4120 was revised in Owner is not permitted to qualify material manufacturers and sup. and 3 component during a scheduled system pressure test.and pressure-retaining replacement parts to weld overlay cladding of moderate-energy piping.13 of Chapter 27 for more information. clad and machine system’s return to service. Examination Category B-J. valves.10 of Chapter 27 for more information. XI-1-92-59 Within the acceptance standards and repair welding ments meet original design requirements. and also see XI-1-89-28 IWF-4000 and IWA-4000 are intended to be used Sections 27. Case N-544 partially addresses this situation.1 and 27. Code XI-1-86-36 IWA-4000 rules may be used for welding non Case N-513 addresses this issue for flaws in Class 3 low.4. or 3 XI-1-83-57 Section XI rules for repairs to Classes 1. Code rules apply. Chapter 27 for more information.2 of Chapter 27 for more valve. Case N-517 has partially addressed this problem. See also See Section 27. simultaneously supervise the welding of a single procedure quali- (d) Procurement from a Certificate Holder.5 of Chapter 27 for more information. 2.

3. replacement welding to components and their supports was that the welding requirements of the original construction code be used. contractor (Repair/Replacement Organization) .qxd 5/20/09 8:52 AM Page 359 COMPANION GUIDE TO THE ASME BOILER & PRESSURE VESSEL CODE • 359 XI-1-92-68 Repairs made on items NPS 1 and smaller are not XI-1-98-62 Owner is permitted to subcontract repair/replace- exempt from IWA-4000 requirements. applicable. IWA-4400 may ment activities when all activities are controlled in accordance exempt such repairs from examination or test. trodes for temper-bead repair welding when the electrode manu- XI-98-20R When a flaw meeting the acceptance criteria of facturer permits use of such electrodes taken directly from a IWA-3000 (not a defect) is corrected by mechanical metal freshly-opened hermetically-sealed container.1 of Chapter 27 for more information.10. when used for mitigation of defects by repair/replacement activity. even if that section does not perform XI-1-04-39 For determining applicability under IWA-4132 a pressure-retaining or component support function. PRECAUTIONARY NOTE cedure qualifications were not Section IX with heat treating and impact tests per IWB-4000.4 a gasket or packing and is not required for structural integrity. even though the requirements for welders and welding pro. or Appendix J.2 for more information. age in flanged joints.1. See 27. See 28. applicability before using it as the basis for a decision. See Section with the Owner-approved Quality Assurance Program of the sub- 27. code be used.38 for more information. activity unless the irregularity is considered a defect. as for more information. the work is (Items Rotated from Stock). This Appendix is only a guide to the interpretations: It is pre- IWA-1-98-61 The Section XI defined term “installation” sented to the reader for convenience to assist in locating interpre- includes the joining of items by the Owner or Repair/ Replacement tations that may be relevant to particular situations. XI-1-98-29R When a defect is removed from a section of See 27. and other pressure-retaining encapsulations constructed in are not considered repair/replacement activities subject to the accordance with the Construction Code.9. valve stuffing boxes. the work need not be considered an IWA-4100 XI-1-04-10 IWA-4340. if a repair/replacement activity is implement- ing procedure qualifications were not Section IX with heat treat. However.ASME_Ch26_p323-360. See 27. to review an actual interpretation and its final location in the piping system. however. even though the requirements for welders and weld.4.3 for more information.5.1(b) does not require baking of elec- and 27. IWA-4150(c)(2)(b) does require identification of the (2) The intent of IWA-7320 (through 1990 Addenda) for Construction Code of the item being modified. the use of Construction Code is Section III and NA-3700 or NCA-3800 is sealants is not addressed. (2) Furthermore. The sealant functions like requirements of IWA-4000. IWA-4150(c)(2)(a) does require identifica- was that the welding requirements of the original construction tion of the Construction Code used for the modification.1 XI-1-04-04 IWA-4513. IWA-1-98-54 (1) The intent of IWA-4300 (through 1987 XI-1-04-41 (1) for a modification that changes the design of an Addenda) for repair welding to components and their supports item being replaced. however.3 for more information. provided both sites are covered by the Repair/Replacement remove pitting or other surface irregularity as part of normal Organization’s quality assurance program. See 27. modification.5 for more information. engineered structural XI-1-01-03 Design-only changes that involve no physical work clamps. if the work affects a previ. including Data XI-1-95-26 Sealants have been proposed as repairs to stop leak. reduced to an acceptable size. The use of sealants is nei. XI-1-01-21 A Repair/Replacement Organization.3 for more information. may transfer and use materials from one site to anoth- XI-1-98-08 Machining a component’s sealing surface to er. The reader is Organization into a piping subassembly at a location other than its cautioned. See 27.8. See 27. does not require that the defect be removed or ous examination record. replaced. pressure-retaining material.2 for more maintenance is not considered an IWA-4100 repair/replacement information. when the ther required nor prohibited by Section XI.3. determined by a Section XI evaluation.1 and 27. IWA-7000. Report and ANII services. as long as it is shown that the See 27. considered testing.10. Construction Code requirements for structural integrity are met. indeed. ing a modification that changes the design of the item being ing and impact tests per IWB-4000.10. . removal only. a new preservice examination is required.3. Owner-required inspection is not still considered an IWA-4100 repair/replacement activity.