Nuclear Code Cases Supplement 7 PDF
Nuclear Code Cases Supplement 7 PDF
Nuclear Code Cases Supplement 7 PDF
A N I N T E R N AT I O N A L C O D E
Supplement
NUCLEAR 1998
CODE CASES
COMPONENTS
1998 Edition
The new and revised Cases that appear in this Supplement were considered at the Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Committee meeting of September 17, 1999, and approved by the Board on Nuclear
Codes and Standards on November 11, 1999.
Copyright © 2000 by
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS
All Rights Reserved
Printed in U.S.A.
SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #7 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM1 02-23-00 08:44:31 Rev 15.01
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
Replace or insert the following pages. (Unlisted Index pages have not been changed; unlisted Case
pages of revised Cases are only included to show the revised Case number.)
(c) SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #7 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM1 02-23-00 08:44:31 Rev 15.01
NUMERIC INDEX
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
vii SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
SUPP. 7 — NC viii
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
ix SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
SUPP. 7 — NC x
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
N-566 8-9-96 . . . . . . S
N-566-1 2-15-99 . . . 9-24-99 9-24-02 . . .
N-567 9-2-97 . . . . . . S
N-567-1 2-26-99 . . . . . . 2-26-02 . . .
N-569 8-9-96 . . . . . . S
N-569-1 5-7-99 . . . . . . 5-7-02 . . .
N-576 3-12-97 . . . . . . S
N-576-1 5-7-99 . . . . . . 5-7-02 . . .
xi SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
Approval Expiration
Case Date Errata Reaffirmed Date Annulled
SUPP. 7 — NC xii
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM2 02-14-00 07:49:34 Rev 15.01
SUBJECT INDEX
xiii SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. 7 — NC xiv
xv SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. 7 — NC xvi
xvii SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. 7 — NC xviii
xix SUPP. 7 — NC
N-523 Mechanical Clamping Devices 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition
for Class 2 and 3 Piping Summer 1978
Addenda
N-523-1 Mechanical Clamping Devices 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition
for Class 2 and 3 Piping Summer 1978
Addenda
N-524 Alternative Examination Re- 1974 Edition with the 1995 Edition
quirements for Longitudinal Summer 1975
Welds in Class 1 and 2 Addenda
Piping
N-526 Alternative Requirements for 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Successive Inspections of 1995 Addenda
Class 1 and 2 Vessels
N-528-1 Purchase, Exchange, or Trans- 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition with the
fer of Material Between Nu- Summer 1978 1999 Addenda
clear Plant Sites Addenda
N-532 Alternative Requirements to Re- 1974 Edition with the 1995 Edition
pair and Replacement Docu- Summer 1975
mentation Requirements and Addenda
Inservice Summary Report
Preparation and Submission
as Required by IWA-4000
and IWA-6000
N-533 Alternative Requirements for 1986 Edition 1995 Edition with the
VT-2 Visual Examination of 1996 Addenda
Class 1 Insulated Pressure-
Retaining Bolted Connec-
tions
N-534 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Pneumatic Pressure Testing Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
Addenda
N-535 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Inservice Inspection Intervals 1995 Addenda
N-537 Location of Ultrasonic Depth- 1989 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Sizing Flaws 1989 Addenda 1996 Addenda
N-538 Alternative Requirements for 1989 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Length Sizing Performance 1989 Addenda 1995 Addenda
Demonstrations in Accord-
ance with Appendix VIII,
Supplements 2, 3, 10, 11,
and 12
N-541 Alternative Requirements for 1992 Edition with the 1995 Edition
Performance Demonstration 1993 Addenda
in Accordance with Appen-
dix VIII, Supplements 4 and
6
N-542 Alternative Requirements for 1989 Edition with the 1995 Edition
Nozzle Inside Radius Sec- 1989 Addenda
tion Length Sizing Perform-
ance Demonstration
xxix SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
Applicability
Code Case
No. Title From Up To and Including
N-543 Alternative to Performing Peri- 1977 Edition with the 1989 Edition
odic Calibration Checks Summer 1978
Addenda
N-544 Repair/Replacement of Small 1977 Edition with the 1992 Edition with the
Items Summer 1978 1994 Addenda
Addenda
N-545 Alternative Requirements for 1989 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Conduct of Performance 1996 Addenda
Demonstration Detection
Test of Reactor Vessel
N-546 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Qualification of VT-2 1996 Addenda
Examination Personnel
N-552 Alternative Methods — Qualifi- 1989 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
cation for Nozzle Inside 1989 Addenda 1996 Addenda
Radius Section from the Out-
side Surface
N-553 Inservice Eddy Current Surface 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Examination of Pressure Re- 1996 Addenda
taining Pipe Welds and Noz-
zle-to-Safe End Welds
N-554-1 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Reconciliation of Replace- 1996 Addenda
ment Items
N-555 Use of Section II, V, and IX 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Code Cases Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
Addenda
N-556 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1992 Edition with the
Verification of Acceptability 1993 Addenda
of Replacements
N-557 In-Place Dry Annealing of a 1974 Edition with the 1995 Edition
PWR Nuclear Reactor Summer 1975
Vessel Addenda
N-557-1 In-Place Dry Annealing of a 1974 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
PWR Nuclear Reactor Summer 1975 1996 Addenda
Vessel Addenda
N-560 Alternative Examination Re- 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
quirements for Class 1, Cate- 1996 Addenda
gory B-J Piping Welds
N-560-1 Alternative Examination Re- 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
quirements for Class 1, Cate- 1996 Addenda
gory B-J Piping Welds
N-561 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Wall Thickness Restoration 1996 Addenda
of Class 2 and High Energy
Class 3 Carbon Steel Piping
SUPP. 7 — NC xxx
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
Applicability
Code Case
No. Title From Up To and Including
N-561-1 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Wall Thickness Restoration 1997 Addenda
of Class 2 and High Energy
Class 3 Carbon Steel Piping
N-562 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Wall Thickness Restoration 1996 Addenda
of Class 3 Moderate Energy
Carbon Steel Piping
N-562-1 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Wall Thickness Restoration 1997 Addenda
of Class 3 Moderate Energy
Carbon Steel Piping
N-563 Grading of Examinations, 1986 Edition with the 1992 Edition
IWA-2320 1988 Addenda
N-566 Corrective Action for Leakage 1983 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Identified at Bolted Connec- Winter 1984 1995 Addenda
tions Addenda
N-567 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Class 1, 2, and 3 Replace- Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
ment Components Addenda
N-567-1 Reconciliation Requirements 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition
for Class 1, 2, and 3 Re- Summer 1978 Addenda
placement Component
N-569 Alternative Rules for Repair 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
by Electrochemical Deposi- Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
tion of Class 1 and 2 Steam Addenda
Generator Tubing
N-569-1 Alternative Rules for Repair 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition
by Electrochemical Summer 1978
Deposition of Class 1 and 2 Addenda
Steam Generator Tubing
N-573 Transfer of Procedure Qualifi- 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
cation Records Between Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
Owners Addenda
N-574 NDE Personnel Recertification 1974 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Frequency Summer 1975 1996 Addenda
Addenda
N-575 Alternative Examination Re- 1989 Edition 1995 Edition with the
quirements for Full Penetra- 1995 Addenda
tion Nozzle-to-Vessel Welds
in Reactor Vessels with Set-
On Type Nozzles
N-576 Repair of Class 1 and 2 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
SB-163, UNS N06600 Summer 1978 1996 Addenda
Steam Generator Tubing Addenda
N-576-1 Repair of Class 1 and 2 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition
SB-163, UNS N06600 Summer 1978
Steam Generator Tubing Addenda
xxxi SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
Applicability
Code Case
No. Title From Up To and Including
N-583 Annual Training Alternative 1986 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
1988 Addenda 1996 Addenda
N-587 Alternative NDE Requirements 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
for Repair/Replacement Ac- Summer 1987 Addenda 1997 Addenda
tivities
N-588 Attenuation to Reference Flow 1986 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Orientation of Appendix G 1987 Addenda 1996 Addenda
for Circumferential Welds in
Reactor Vessels
N-589 Class 3 Nonmetallic Cured-In- 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Place Piping Summer 1978 1997 Addenda
Addenda
N-590 Alternative to the Require- 1992 Edition 1995 Edition with the
ments of Subsection IWE, 1996 Addenda
Requirements for Class MC
and Metallic Liners of Class
CC Components of Light-
Water Cooled Plants
N-591 Alternative to the Require- 1992 Edition 1995 Edition with the
ments of Subsection IWL, 1996 Addenda
Requirements for Class CC
Concrete Components of
Light-Water Cooled Plants
N-592 ASNT Central Certification 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Program 1997 Addenda
N-593 Alternative Examination Re- 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
quirements for Steam Gener- 1997 Addenda
ator Nozzle-to-Vessel Welds
N-597 Requirements for Analytical 1974 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Evaluation of Pipe Wall 1997 Addenda
Thinning
N-598 Alternative Requirements to Re- 1977 Edition 1995 Edition with the
quired Percentages of Exami- 1996 Addenda
nations
N-599 Alternatives to Qualification of 1992 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Nondestructive Examination 1992 Addenda 1997 Addenda
Personnel for Inservice In-
spection of Metal (Class
MC) and Concrete (Class
CC) Containments
N-601 Extent of Frequency of VT-3 1989 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Visual Examination for Inser- 1996 Addenda
vice Inspection of Metal
Containments
N-603 Alternative to the Require- 1989 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
ments of IWL-2421, Sites 1991 Addenda 1996 Addenda
With Two Plants
SUPP. 7 — NC xxxii
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
Applicability
Code Case
No. Title From Up To and Including
N-604 Alternative to Bolt Torque or 1989 Edition 1995 Edition with the
Tension Test Requirements 1996 Addenda
of Table IWE-2500-1, Cate-
gory E-G, Item E8.20
N-605 Alternative to the Require- 1989 Edition 1995 Edition with the
ments of IWE-2500(c) for 1996 Addenda
Augmented Examination of
Surface Areas
N-606 Similar and Dissimilar Metal 1977 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
Welding Using Ambient Summer 1978 1997 Addenda
Temperature Machine Addenda
GTAW Temper Bead Tech-
nique
N-606-1 Similar and Dissimilar Metal 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition with the
Welding Using Ambient Summer 1978 1999 Addenda
Temperature Machine Addenda
GTAW Temper Bead Tech-
nique for BWR CRD Hous-
ing/Stud Tube Repairs
N-613 Ultrasonic Examination of Full 1989 Edition with the 1998 Edition
Penetration Nozzles in Ves- 1989 Addenda
sels, Examination Category
B-D, Item No’s. B3.10 and
B3.90, Reactor Vessel-to-
Nozzle Welds, Fig. IWB-
2500-7(a), (b), and (c)
N-616 Alternative Requirements for 1983 Edition with the 1998 Addenda
VT-2 Visual Examination of Winter 1984
Classes 1, 2, and 3 Insu- Addenda
lated Pressure-Retaining
Bolted Connections
N-617 Alternative Examination Distri- 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition
bution Requirements for Ta- Summer 1978 Addenda
ble IWC-2500-1 Examination
Category C-G, Pressure Re-
taining Welds in Pumps and
Valves
N-619 Alternative Requirements for 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition
Nozzle Inner Radius Inspec- Summer 1978 Addenda
tions for Class 1 Pressurizer
and Steam Generator
Nozzles
N-627 VT-1 Visual Examination in 1977 Edition with the 1989 Edition
Lieu of Surface Examination 1978 Addenda
for RPV Closure Nuts
xxxiii SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
Applicability
Code Case
No. Title From Up To and Including
N-629 Use of Fracture Toughness 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition with the
Test Data to Establish Summer 1978 1999 Addenda
Reference Temperature for Addenda
Pressure Retaining Materials
N-630 Alternatives to VT-1C and 1992 Edition with the 1995 Edition with the
VT-3C Visual Examination 1992 Addenda 1996 Addenda
for Inservice Inspection of
Concrete and VT-1 Visual
Examination for Inservice In-
spection of Anchorage Hard-
ware and Surrounding Con-
crete for Concrete
Containments
N-638 Similar and Dissimilar Metal 1977 Edition with the 1998 Edition with the
Welding Using Ambient Summer 1978 1999 Addenda
Temperature Machine Addenda
GTAW Temper Bead Tech-
nique
N-639 Alternative Calibration Block 1986 Edition with the 1998 Edition with the
Material 1987 Addenda 1999 Addenda
N-640 Alternative Reference Fracture 1992 1998 Edition
Toughness for Development
of P-T Limit Curves
NOTES:
(1) Applies to the 1974 Edition of Section V.
(2) Applies to the 1974 Edition with the Winter 1976 Addenda of Section V.
(3) Applies to the 1980 Edition of Section V.
SUPP. 7 — NC xxxiv
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC9807$FM4 02-14-00 07:57:33 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-443-2
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that the GENERAL NOTE: The fatigue design curve of Fig. I-9.1 of the
Appendix shall be used.
materials and procedures specified in the Inquiry may
be used in the construction of Class 1 components
under the rules of Section III, Division 1, provided
the following additional requirements are met. (c) The stress intensity, yield strength, and ultimate
(a) The maximum design metal temperatures shall tensile values are given in Table 1.
not exceed 700°F. (d) All other requirements of Section III shall be met.
(b) The minimum thickness of pressure retaining (e) This material shall not be used for welded con-
parts shall be 1⁄4 in. The maximum thickness shall be struction.
limited only by the ability to develop the specified (f) This Case number shall be listed in the Data
mechanical properties. Report Form for the component.
567 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #7 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071001 02-22-00 08:52:40 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 568
SUPP. #7 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071001 02-22-00 08:52:40 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-474-2
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-474-2
Design Stress Intensities and Yield Strength
Values for UNS N06690 With a Minimum
Specified Yield Strength of 35 ksi, Class 1
Components
Section III, Division 1
ANNULLED
635 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071002 02-14-00 07:59:32 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 636
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071002 02-14-00 07:59:32 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-492-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-492-1
Grade 9 Titanium Alloy Tubing
Section III, Division 1, Class 1, 2, and 3
ANNULLED
677 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071003 02-14-00 08:00:00 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 678
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071003 02-14-00 08:00:00 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-502
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-502
SA-268, Grade 26-3-3 (UNS S44660)
Section III, Division 1, Class 2 and 3
ANNULLED
729 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071004 02-14-00 08:00:20 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 730
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071004 02-14-00 08:00:20 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-554-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
889 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071005 02-14-00 08:00:55 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-554-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
specification and later Editions and Addenda of the differences, to the corresponding ASTM A or B Specifi-
same Construction Code or Section III when the Con- cation, either specification may be used.
struction Code was not Section III, provided the materi- (b) When an SFA Specification is identified as being
als are the same specification, grade, type, class, or identical, or identical except for editorial differences,
alloy, and heat-treated condition, as applicable. to the corresponding AWS Specification, either specifi-
(b) Differences in the specified material tensile and cation may be used.
yield strength shall be compared and evaluated. If the
replacement material has a lower strength, a comparison
shall be made of the allowable stresses. If the tensile 5.0 RECONCILIATION OF PARTS,
or yield strength is reduced and allowable stresses are APPURTENANCES, AND PIPING
reduced, the effect of the reduction on the design shall SUBASSEMBLIES
be reconciled. For welding materials, any reduction in
specified tensile strength shall be evaluated to ensure (a) Parts, appurtenances, and piping subassemblies
that the strength of the filler metal meets or exceeds may be fabricated to later Editions and Addenda of
the strength of the base materials. the Construction Code and later different Construction
Codes, as permitted by para. 1.1(b), provided materials
4.2 Identical Material Procured to an Earlier are reconciled in accordance with para. 4.0. The Owner
Construction Code Edition or Addenda or shall evaluate any changes in weight, configuration, or
Material Specification pressure-temperature rating.
(b) An earlier Edition or Addenda of the same Con-
(a) Materials, including welding materials, may meet struction Code may be used, provided all technical
the requirements of earlier dates of issue of the material requirements of the original Construction Code of the
specification and earlier Editions and Addenda of the component being replaced are met, except as permitted
same Construction Code, provided the materials are by para. 4.0. Failure to meet the technical requirements
the same specification, grade, type, class, or alloy, and of the original Construction Code may not be accepted
heat-treated condition, as applicable. by reconciliation.
(b) Differences in the specified material tensile and
yield strength shall be compared and evaluated. If the
replacement material has a lower strength, a comparison
6.0 RECONCILIATION OF DESIGN
shall be made of the allowable stresses. If the tensile
REQUIREMENTS
or yield strength is reduced and allowable stresses are
reduced, the effect of the reduction on the design shall 6.1 Design to All Requirements of a Later
be reconciled. For welding materials, any reduction in Construction Code Edition or Addenda
specified tensile strength shall be evaluated to ensure
(a) When an item is designed to all the requirements
that the strength of the filler metal meets or exceeds
of a later Construction Code Edition or Addenda or
the strength of the base materials.
to Section III when the Construction Code was not
(c) Material examination and testing requirements
Section III, reconciliation beyond those design related
from the Construction Code of the item shall be met.
issues defined in paras. 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 is not required.
4.3 Use of a Different Material 6.2 Design to Portions of the Requirements of a
(a) Use of materials of a specification, grade, type, Later Construction Code Edition or
class, or alloy, and heat-treated condition, other than Addenda
that originally specified, shall be evaluated for suitability (a) When an item is designed to portions of the
for the specified design and operating conditions. requirements of a later Construction Code Edition or
(b) Material examination and testing requirements Addenda or to Section III when the Construction Code
shall be reconciled to the Construction Code require- was not Section III, the following reconciliation beyond
ments of the item. those design related issues defined in paras. 3.0, 4.0,
and 5.0 shall be performed.
4.4 Substitution of Material Specifications
(1) Material fabrication and examination require-
(a) When an SA or SB Specification is identified ments (e.g., NX-2000, NX-4000, NX-5000 of Section
as being identical, or identical except for editorial III) shall be reviewed to reconcile the details applicable
SUPP. 7 — NC 890
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071005 02-14-00 08:00:55 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
903 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 7 — NC
N-560-1
CASE (continued)
TABLE 1
EXAMINATION CATEGORIES B-J — CLASS 1 PIPING
Examination Acceptance Extent and Frequency Deferral to
Item Parts Examined Requirement Examination Standard Successive End of
No. [Note (1)] Fig. No. [Note (11)] Method [Note (11)] 1st [Note (6)] Interval
B9.11 Elements Subject to IWB-2500-8(c)[Note (2)] Volumetric IWB-3514 Element Same Not
Thermal Fatigue IWB-2500-9,10,11 [Notes (3), (4), (5)] as 1st Permissible
B9.12 Elements Subject to High Visual, VT-2 IWB-3142 Each Refueling Same as Not
Cycle Mechanical Fatigue Outage 1st Permissible
B9.13 Elements Subject to Corro- IWB-2500-8(c) Surface IWB-3514 Element Same as Not
sion, Erosion, or Cavi- [Notes (3), (4)] 1st Permissible
904
tation Volumetric IWB-3514 Element
[Notes (3), (4)
B9.14 Elements Subject to Crev- [Note (8)] Volumetric IWB-3514 Element Same as Not
ice Corrosion Cracking [Notes (3), (4)] 1st Permissible
B9.15 Elements Subject to Pri- Visual, VT-2 IWB-3142 Each Same as Not
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
TABLE 1 (CONT’D)
EXAMINATION CATEGORIES B-J — CLASS 1 PIPING
Examination Acceptance Extent and Frequency Deferral to
Item Parts Examined Requirement Examination Standard Successive End of
No. [Note (1)] Fig. No. [Note (11)] Method [Note (1)] 1st [Note (6)] Interval
B9.17 Elements Subject to Micro- Visual, VT-3 [Note (9)] Element Same as Not
biologically Influenced or Volumetric [Notes (3), (4)] 1st Permissible
Corrosion (MIC) [Note (9)]
B9.18 Elements Subject to Flow [Note (10)] [Note (10)] [Note (10)] [Note (10)] [Note (10)] [Note (10)]
Accelerated Corrosion
(FAC)
NOTES:
905
(1) Piping larger than NPS 1.
(2) The length of the examination volume shall be increased to include 1⁄2 in. beyond each side of the base metal thickness transition or counterbore.
(3) Includes examination locations identified in accordance with the risk-based selection procedures in Appendix I or II.
(4) Includes 100% of the examination location. When the required examination volume or area cannot be examined due to interference by another component or part geometry,
limited examinations shall be evaluated by the ISI Selection Team for acceptability. Areas with acceptable limited examinations, and their bases, shall be documented.
(5) The examination shall include any longitudinal welds at the locations selected for examination in Note (3). The longitudinal weld examination requirements shall be met for both
transverse and parallel flaws within the examination volume defined in Note (3).
(9) The examination volume shall include base metal, welds, and weld heat affected zones in the affected regions of carbon and low alloy steel, and within the welds and weld heat
affected zones of austenitic stainless steel. The examination region shall be sufficient to characterize the extent of the MIC degradation. Examinations shall verify that the
minimum wall thickness required by the Construction Code exists.
(10) In accordance with the Owner’s existing FAC program.
(11) Paragraph and figure numbers refer to the 1989 Edition.
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
N-560-1
CASE (continued)
SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. 5 — NC 906
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
APPENDIX I
REQUIREMENTS FOR ISI SELECTION TEAMS AND
EXAMINATION ZONE SELECTION
907 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE I-1
DEGRADATION MECHANISMS
Mechanism Attributes Susceptible Regions
1 Thermal Fatigue Intermittent Cold Water Injection (a), (b), (c) Nozzles, branch pipe connections,
(a) Thermal Shock Low Flow, Little Fluid Mixing (a), (b) safe ends, welds, HAZ, and base
(b) Stratification Notch-Like Stress Risers (a), (b) metal regions of high stress
(c) Striping Very Frequent Cycling (b), (c) concentration
Unstable Turbulence Penetration into Stagnant
Lines (b), (c)
Bypass leakage in valves with large ⌬Ts (b), (c)
2 Flow Accelerated Turbulent Flow at Sharp Radius Elbows and Tees
Corrosion Proximity to Pumps, Valves and Orifices
Material Chromium Content
Fluid pH
Oxygen
Temperature
3 Erosion-Cavitation Severe Discontinuities in Flow Path Fittings, welds, and HAZ
Proximity to Pump, Throttle Valve, Reducing Valve,
or Flow Orifice
4 Corrosion Aggressive Environment (a), (c) Base metal, welds, and HAZ
(a) General Corrosion Oxidizing Environment (b), (c)
(b) Crevice Corrosion Material (a), (d)
(c) Pitting Temperature (a), (d)
(d) MIC Contaminants (sulfur species, chlorides, etc.) (b)
Crevice Condition (b)
Stagnant Region (b)
Low Flow (c)
Lay up (d)
5 Stress Corrosion Cracking Susceptible Material (a) Austenitic stainless steel welds and
(a) IGSCC Oxidizing Environment (a), (b) HAZ (a)
(b) TGSCC Stress (residual, applied) (a), (b) Mill annealed Alloy 600 nozzle
(c) PWSCC Initiating Contaminants welds and HAZ without stress
(sulfur species, chlorides, etc.) (a) relief (c)
(aqueous halides or concentrated caustic) (b)
Temperature (a), (b)
Strain Rate (environmentally assisted cracking) (a), (b)
Fabrication Practice (e.g., weld ID grinding, cold work) (a)
Notch-like Stress Risers
6 Water Hammer Potential for Fluid Voiding and Relief Valve Discharge
[Note (1)]
NOTE:
(1) Water hammer is a rare, severe loading condition as opposed to a degradation mechanism, but its potential at a location, in conjunction
with one or more of the listed degradation mechanisms, could be cause for a higher examination zone ranking.
SUPP. 7 — NC 908
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE I-2
DEGRADATION MECHANISM CATEGORY
Large Pipe
Break Degradation Degradation
Potential Conditions Category Mechanism
scribed in Table I-2, in accordance with their probabil- (e) System Impact/Recovery. The means of detecting
ity of causing a large pipe break. Segments susceptible a failure, and the technical specifications associated
to FAC shall be classified in the large break category. with the system and other impacted systems shall be
Segments susceptible to any of the other degradation evaluated. The possible automatic and operator actions
mechanisms shall be classified in the small leak cate- to prevent a loss of systems shall also be evaluated.
gory. Segments having degradation mechanisms listed (f) System Redundancy. The existence of redundant
in the small leak category shall be upgraded to the flow paths for accident mitigation purposes shall be
large break category, if the pipe segments also have considered.
the potential for water hammer loads.
I-2.4 Consequence Evaluation
I-2.4.1 Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). I-2.4.2 Impact Group Assessment. The FMEA im-
Potential failure modes for each pipe segment shall be pacts for each pipe segment shall be classified into
identified, and their effects shall be evaluated. The evalua- one of three impact groups: initiating event, system,
tion shall consider the following: or combination. The consequence category (high, me-
(a) Break Size. The consequence analysis shall be dium, or low) shall then be selected in accordance
performed assuming a large break for most segments. with (a) through (c).
The exceptions are piping for which a smaller leak is (a) Initiating Event Impact Group Assessment. When
more conservative, or when a small leak can be justified a postulated break in a Class 1 pipe segment results
through a leak-before-break analysis in accordance with in only an initiating event (e.g., loss of coolant accident,
the criteria specified in NUREG-1061, Volume 3, and loss of feedwater, reactor trip), the consequence shall
10CFR50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria 4. be classified into one of four categories: high, medium,
(b) Isolability of the Break. A break can be automati- low, or none. The initiating event categories shall be
cally isolated by a check valve, a closed isolation valve, assigned according to the following:
or an isolation valve that closes on a given signal or (1) The initiating event shall be placed into one
by operator action. of the categories in Table I-3. These shall include all
(c) Spatial Effects. These include the effects of flood, applicable design basis events previously analyzed in
spray, and pipe whip. the Owners updated final safety analysis report PSA,
(d) Initiating Events. These shall be identified using or IPE.
a plant-specific list of initiating events from the plant (2) Breaks that cause an initiating event classified
Probabilistic Safety Assessment/Individual Plant Exami- as routine operation (Category I) are not relevant to
nation (PSA/IPE) and the plant design basis. this analysis.
909 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE I-3
CONSEQUENCE CATEGORIES FOR INITIATING EVENT IMPACT GROUP
Design Representative
Basis Initiating Initiating Example
Event Event Event Frequency Initiating Consequence
Category Type Range (1/yr) Events Category
I Routine Operation >1 None
(3) If a postulated pipe break in a segment results upon. This corresponds to the frequency of initiating
in a Category II anticipated operational occurrence, the events that require the system operation.
assigned consequence category for the segment is low. (2) Number of backup systems available, which
(4) For pipe segment breaks that result in Category determines how many unaffected systems are available
III (Infrequent Event) or Category IV (Limiting Fault to perform the same mitigating function as the degraded
or Accident), the initiating event shall be assigned or failed system.
according to the plant PSA conditional core damage (3) Exposure time, which determines the time the
probability (CCDP) criteria specified in Table I-4. system would be unavailable before the plant is changed
(b) System Impact Group Assessment. The conse- to a different mode in which the failed system’s function
quence category of a pipe segment failure that does is no longer required, the failure is recovered, or
not cause an initiating event, but that degrades or fails other compensatory action is taken. Exposure time is
a system essential to plant safety, shall be based on a function of the detection time and allowed outage time.
the three attributes discussed below: Consequence Categories shall be assigned in accord-
(1) Frequency of challenge, which determines how ance with Table I-5 as High, Medium or Low. As
often the mitigating function of the system is called with the initiating event group (Table I-3), frequency
of challenge is grouped into design basis event catego-
ries (II, III, and IV). Exposure time shall be obtained
from Technical Specification limits, and shall be classi-
TABLE I-4
fied as long (> 24 hrs) or short (not to exceed 24
QUANTITATIVE INDICES FOR CONSEQUENCE hrs). In lieu of Table I-5, quantitative indices based
CATEGORIES FOR CATEGORY III AND IV EVENTS on conditional core damage frequency may be used on
the basis of the plant’s PSA/IPE; consequence categories
CCDP Consequence Category
shall be assigned in accordance with Table I-4.
≥ 10 −4 High (c) Combination Impact Group Assessment. The con-
10 −6 ≤ CCDP < 10 −4 Medium sequence category for a pipe segment whose failure
< 10 −6 Low
results in both an initiating event and the degradation
SUPP. 7 — NC 910
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
or loss of a system shall be determined from Table All pipe segments in the Class 1 systems addressed
I-6. The consequence category is a function of two in accordance with this Case shall be classified, into
factors: one of the above seven risk categories, using the risk
(1) Use of the system as a mitigating function for matrix.
the induced initiating event; and
(2) Number of unaffected backup systems or trains I-2.6 Structural Elements and Examination Zone
available to perform the same function. Selection
The selection team shall identify the structural ele-
ments such as welds, fittings, or pipe sections, within
I-2.5 Segment Risk Categorization each pipe segment, based on susceptibility to the applica-
ble damage mechanisms identified for that segment.
I-2.5.1 Risk Matrix. The risk of pipe segment fail-
For examination zone selection, each pipe segment shall
ure shall be evaluated on the basis of the expected
be classified in accordance with I-2.5 in one of the
likelihood of the event and the expected consequence.
following risk groups:
The likelihood of failure is estimated based on the
segment exposure to varying degradation mechanisms,
and is represented by the degradation mechanism cate- Risk Group Segment Risk Category
gory assigned to the segment in accordance with I-2.3.
High 1, 2, and 3
Consequence is represented by the consequence cate-
gory assigned to the segment in accordance with I-2.4. Medium 4 and 5
The structure used to document the results of this
analysis is called a Risk Matrix and is illustrated in Low 6 and 7
Table I-7. Each pipe segment shall be assigned to
one of the risk categories in Table I-7, based on its Examination zones shall be selected starting with
damage mechanism and consequence category. the structural elements in the High risk group and
working toward the Low risk group, until a total number
I-2.5.2 Risk Categories. The three degradation of structural elements equal to 10% of the Category
mechanism categories and four consequence categories B-J piping welds, excluding socket welds, has been
shall be combined into seven risk categories, as selected.
follows: Examinations may be concentrated on systems with
more high-risk segments, such that a larger percentage
Risk Category Risk Area
of structural elements in the high-risk Categories 1, 2,
1 High Consequences and Large Break and 3 are examined.
Degradation Mechanism
911 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE I-5
CONSEQUENCE CATEGORIES FOR SYSTEM IMPACT GROUP
GENERAL NOTE:
H p Consequence Category High
M p Consequence Category Medium
L p Consequence Category Low
TABLE I-6
CONSEQUENCE CATEGORIES FOR COMBINATION IMPACT GROUP
Event Consequence Category
NOTE:
(1) The higher category from Table I-3 or Table I-6 shall be assigned.
SUPP. 7 — NC 912
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE I-7
RISK MATRIX FOR PIPE SEGMENTS
Risk Consequence Category
Categories
High-Cat. 1, 2, 3
Medium-Cat. 4, 5 None Low Medium High
Low-Cat. 6, 7
Degradation Mechanism Category
in this section for the relevant damage mechanism can to be effective for specific degradation mechanisms and
be used effectively for the defined examination volumes. examination locations. The examination volumes and
(d) Radiation Exposure. Elements shall be selected methods that are appropriate for each degradation mech-
to minimize personnel radiation exposure during exami- anism are provided in Table 1. The methods and
nation. procedures used for the examinations shall be qualified
(e) Relative degradation severity for specific degrada- to reliably detect and size the relevant degradation
tion mechanisms, when applicable (e.g., wear or erosion mechanisms identified for each examination zone. Per-
rates for flow-accelerated corrosion, Temperature Differ- sonnel performing the examinations shall be qualified
ential or Richardson number for thermal fatigue, to use these procedures. Examinations shall be con-
NUREG-0313, Revision 2 weld categorization for ducted in accordance with IWA-2000.
IGSCC). Examinations for elements in Risk Category
4 segments shall be concentrated on any areas of
I-4.0 RE-EVALUATION OF RISK-BASED
significant stress concentration, geometric discontinu-
SELECTIONS
ities, or terminal ends.
(f) Elements having break or consequence limiting The affected portions of the risk-based inservice
devices e.g., pipe whip restraints, need not be examined, examination program shall be re-evaluated as new
if these have not been credited in the consequence information affecting the selection and scope of the
evaluation. program becomes available. Examples include piping
Examination programs developed in accordance with system design changes, industry-wide failure notifica-
this Case shall use NDE techniques that are designed tions, and prior examination results.
913 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 914
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
APPENDIX II
REQUIREMENTS FOR ISI SELECTION TEAMS AND
INSPECTION LOCATIONS
914.1 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
SUPP. 7 — NC 914.2
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) technique, for all failure modes. The RAW is calculated by
and relevant plant information, including the plant PSA reevaluating the PSA model and substituting a value
results. of unity for the component unavailability under the
(c) Assess or calculate, rank, and then select the appropriate boundary conditions and system function(s)
locations, such as welds, elbows, and tees, within the belonging to the piping segment. Thus, RAW is repre-
ranked list of piping segments. sented as follows:
(d) Determine the areas or volumes of the selected
piping structural elements to be scheduled for examina-
tion, and the appropriate examination methods or moni- RAW p Ri+/Ro
toring techniques to be used, in accordance with Table
1 or II-6.1.
where
II-4.2.2 Risk Importance Measures. Risk Reduc- Ri+p the increased risk level (core damage frequency
tion Worth (RRW) shall be used as the primary risk or large early release frequency) with compo-
importance measure in this selection process. In ac- nent i assumed failed
cordance with II-4.2.6(b) or II-4.2.9(b)(3), the Risk Rop the base risk level (core damage frequency or
Achievement Worth (RAW) importance measure may large early release frequency)
be considered by the ISI selection team. RRW and
RAW are used in risk importance measures, calcula- II-4.2.3 Selection of Systems. Systems to be con-
tions, as discussed below: sidered shall be determined from the boundary require-
(a) Risk Reduction Worth. RRW indicates the reduc- ments of II-3.0.
tion factor in risk if the piping is assumed perfectly
reliable for all failure modes. The RRW is calculated II-4.2.4 Piping Segment Risk Ranking and Selec-
by reevaluating the PSA model and substituting a value tion. The selected systems (as identified in II-4.2.3)
of zero for the component unavailability under the shall be further evaluated at the piping segment level.
appropriate boundary conditions and system function(s) The ranking process is found in II-4.2.5 and II-4.2.6.
for each piping segment of interest. Thus, RRW is II-4.2.5 Calculate Piping Segment Risk Impor-
represented as follows: tances. A FMECA technique, shall be used to rank
piping segments within the selected systems on the
basis of core damage frequency and, as appropriate,
RRW p Ro /Ri
large early release frequency. Relevant plant informa-
tion that is used for initial formulation of the FMECA
where shall be as realistic as possible and reflect current
Rip the decreased risk level (total core damage fre- plant operational practices. The selected FMECA tech-
quency or large early release frequency) with nique should include at least the following infor-
the component assumed to be perfectly reliable mation.
Rop the base risk level (total core damage frequency (a) Piping Segment. A location and boundary descrip-
or large early release frequency) tion of the segment that includes consideration of the
(1) Fussell-Vesely. Fussel-Vesely (F-V) impor- number of structural elements, such as elbows, flow
tance may be used in lieu of RRW because of the reducers, welds, and fittings, within the segment, and
mathematical relationship between the measures. The their nominal pipe size.
following relationship allows translation of F-V results (b) Failure Mode. Identification of the full range of
to RRW if the F-V is less than 0.1: potential failure modes, such as break size, mechanical
fatigue, thermal fatigue, stress corrosion cracking, and
flow accelerated corrosion (FAC), that may occur within
1 the piping segment, and the identification of the particu-
RRW p lar structural elements where these failures are most
[1 − (F-V)]
likely to occur.
(c) Failure Probability. Estimates of the failure prob-
(b) Risk Achievement Worth. RAW indicates the in- ability of a piping segment under consideration assuming
crease factor in risk if the piping is assumed failed no inspection. Failure probabilities (on demand) and
914.3 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE II-1
DEFINITION OF FAILURE PROBABILITY ESTIMATES FOR PIPE SEGMENTS
failure rates (per hour or per year) are required inputs in having the selected experts relate their knowledge
to the consequence calculations. These terms are used of piping failures to a failure probability. Structural
interchangeably throughout this text. The piping segment reliability/risk assessment models that are used to esti-
failure rate is analogous to the active component failure mate piping failure probabilities must contain the follow-
rates that are used in the PSA, where the rate is the ing fundamental parameters:
number of observed failures divided by the number of (1) an appropriate geometric characterization of
years. A failure rate is used for initiating events, such the piping segment of interest;
as the range of Loss of Coolant Accidents (LOCAs), (2) flaw density and a size distribution after preser-
and steam line breaks; and for systems that continuously vice inspection;
operate (i.e., not demand-based, such as a pump failure (3) a characterization of the loading conditions,
to run for a desired mission time). The demand-based including mean stress, cyclic stress, number of cycles
piping failure probability is analogous to the active for both normal and off-normal events; a probabilistic
component failure probabilities that are used in the treatment of the frequency and loading uncertainty of
PSA, where the probability is the number of observed these events shall also be included;
failures over the number of demands, such as a pump (4) the failure modes and degradation mecha-
failure to start on demand. The demand-based piping nism(s) that are identified to potentially occur within
failure probability is used for events in which a piping the piping segment of interest shall be appropriately
segment or system is called upon to function when a characterized over the lifetime of the piping system,
given event occurs. including a probabilistic treatment of the uncertainties
Historical or service data, expert judgment, and/or in these, particularly those associated with aging effects;
structural reliability/risk assessment calculations shall (5) appropriate failure criteria shall be included,
be used to estimate piping segment failure probabilities. such as a limited loss of pipe wall, leaks, and rupture;
The selected experts for the expert judgment process the uncertainties in these parameters should also be
shall have sufficient PSA knowledge to consider how probabilistically treated, as appropriate;
these issues would be used in the risk evaluations. The (6) the probabilistic calculations shall be performed
expert judgment process shall integrate information using accepted mathematical processes, such as Monte-
from utility engineers and technical staff from relevant Carlo simulation, that are verified by appropriate means.
disciplines related to the ranking process. Table II-1 The above noted fundamental parameters for the
provides some definitions that have been found useful structural reliability/risk assessment calculations should
SUPP. 7 — NC 914.4
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
also be considered if historical or service data, or expert desired, then the ISI selection team shall utilize this
judgment processes are used to estimate piping failure parameter to modify the failure consequence established
probabilities. Only estimates of overall failure probabili- earlier in this process for the applicable piping segment.
ties for the pipe segments are needed. The estimates The ISI selection team shall review the impact of
should be based on the scope of structural elements potential operator recovery actions to mitigate the effects
within the piping segment, and consideration of particu- of piping failures on the risk ranking.
lar structural elements that will dominate the overall (f) Core Damage Frequency. This value provides
failure probability for the piping segment. the risk, in terms of core damage frequency, in units
(d) Failure Consequence. Failure consequences are: of events per year, associated with the failure of the
(1) those pressure boundary failures affecting the piping segment under consideration. The conditional
function of the system in question often referred to as core damage frequency/probability per failure is
direct effects. The direct effects to be considered include multiplied by the segment failure probability/rate, and
(a) failures that cause an initiating event such combined with the recovery action, to obtain a core
as LOCA or reactor trip damage frequency due to piping failures for each seg-
(b) failures that disable a single train or system ment. The large early release frequency shall also be
(c) failures that disable multiple trains or evaluated, as appropriate.
systems (g) Piping Segment Importances. The risk importance
(d) failures that cause any combination of the measures defined in II-4.2.2 shall be used to assist in
failures above. the piping segment risk ranking.
(2) those pressure boundary failures affecting other (h) Remarks. Any other information, including the
systems, components or piping segments, often referred evaluation of plant operating modes other than at-power
to as spatial or indirect effects, such as failures that and external events, that is appropriate to establish the
cause pipe whip, jet impingement, or flooding. importance of the piping segment shall be considered
The total effect on core damage and, as appropriate, by the ISI selection team.
large early release, given the failure of the piping
segment under consideration, shall be assessed. Consid-
eration shall be given to the failure mode of the potential II-4.2.6 Select Safety-Significant Piping Seg-
piping failure in terms of a demand-based or time- ments. The ISI selection team shall conduct the task
related failure. The consequences must then be measured listed below.
in the correct terms to ensure proper calculations of (a) The risk-importance measure RRW shall be ap-
the risk measures. plied as described in II-4.2.2. The piping segments
The spatial effects of piping segment failure on shall then be ranked in decreasing order of the RRW
other systems, components or piping segments shall be value.
approximated using the Owner’s Requirements. These (b) Ideally, the selection criteria established by this
effects shall be appropriately reflected in the risk rank- quantitative approach should capture the safety-signifi-
ing. Previous plant hazard evaluations are useful in this cant piping segments, but the following condition shall
process, along with a plant walkdown. Any qualitative also be considered by the ISI selection team.
assessment, which when performed to determine that (1) All piping segments shall be evaluated by the
the effect on impacted targets would not ISI selection team to determine whether any piping
(1) cause any additional effects segment was inappropriately ranked. RAW insights may
(2) interfere with the system operation or be considered. Considerations should be given to the
(3) prevent plant shutdown limitations of the PSA implementation approach re-
(4) shall be appropriately documented sulting from the PSA structure and to limitations in the
(e) Recovery Action. Generally the probability of meanings and uncertainty associated with the importance
recovery of the operator staff has been incorporated measures.
into the plant PSA. There may be occurrences where (2) The ISI selection team should also consider
operator recovery actions have not been incorporated defense-in-depth, aging, deterministic, and operational
into the PSA. These situations shall be thoroughly insights from inspection results, industry data, and
evaluated by the ISI selection team to ensure against available pipe failure data, and other PSA application
applying the recovery action twice. If this situation impacts. The ISI selection team shall then determine
occurs, and credit for the operator recovery action is if revision to the ranked list is necessary.
914.5 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
(c) The final ranked list of piping segments, along (1) All piping structural elements shall be evalu-
with the rationale for any adjustments and decisions, ated by the ISI selection team to determine whether any
shall be documented. The ranking and selection of piping structural element was inappropriately ranked.
structural elements from the final list of piping segments, (2) If no quantitative values are calculated, then
as described in II-4.2.7, shall be performed. a ranking shall be performed by the ISI selection
team. This ranking shall include the calculated failure
II-4.2.7 Process for Ranking and Selecting Piping probability results used in the segment selection process
Structural Elements. The ranked list of piping seg- as follows:
ments, as identified in II-4.2.6 shall be selected for (a) For segments that have a high consequence
further evaluation at the piping structural element of failure but no known failure mechanism (i.e., failure
level. The ranking process is found in II-4.2.8 and probability ≤ 1.0E-8), a minimum of one structural
II-4.2.9. element shall be selected for examination.
(b) For segments that have a high consequence
II-4.2.8 Piping Structural Element Importance Cal- of failure, but a potential failure mechanism is expected
culations. The objective of this step is to allocate to exist (i.e., failure probability > 1.0E-8), a minimum of
the overall failure probability and risk contributions one structural element shall be selected for examination
estimated previously for each piping segment to the based on an evaluation by the ISI selection team that
highest potential failure locations within the piping considers this element to have the highest potential for
segment. The risk-importance calculations for piping failure. Additional failure probability calculations may
structural elements includes the following steps: have to be performed on adjacent elements to confirm
(a) The consequences of failure for the structural this judgment.
elements shall be based on the consequences used in (c) RAW insights may be considered. Consider-
II-4.2.5(d) for evaluations of piping segment failures. ation shall be given to the limitations of the PSA
(b) Probabilities of failure and failure rates for the implementation approach resulting from the PSA struc-
structural elements shall be estimated using historical ture and to limitations in the meanings and uncertainty
or service data, expert judgment, and/or structural reli- associated with the importance measures. The ISI selec-
ability/risk assessment calculated predictions similar to tion team shall also consider defense-in-depth, aging,
those used in II-4.2.5(c). This process identifies the deterministic, and operational insights from inspection
most likely locations for structural failures and the results, industry data, available pipe failure data, and
failure modes within the piping segments. other PSA application impacts.
(c) Where locations of potentially high stresses or (c) The final ranked list of piping structural elements,
active failure modes can be identified, the overall failure along with the rationale for any adjustments and deci-
probability for the piping segment should be more sions, shall be documented.
heavily allocated to these locations. Where no clear (d) Structural elements shall be selected from the
failure mode can be identified, a uniform allocation of list identified in (c) starting with the highest rank
probabilities may be considered. element working towards the lower ranked elements
(d) The same risk-importance measures identified in until a total number of elements equal to 10% of the
II-4.2.2 may be used to assist in the selection of the Category B-J piping welds, excluding socket welds,
piping structural elements. has been selected.
SUPP. 7 — NC 914.6
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-560-1
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
areas or volumes of concern shall be determined using of the changes to the piping selections that do occur
Table 1 and documented by the Owner. shall be documented.
914.7 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
914.8
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071006 02-16-00 10:55:29 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-632
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-632
Use of ASTM A 572, Grades 50 and 65 for
Structural Attachments to Class CC Containment
Liners
Section III, Division 2
1108.13 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071007 02-14-00 08:38:26 Rev 15.01
1108.13
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071007 02-14-00 08:38:26 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-635
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-635 fusion welded pipe with addition of filler metal may
Use of 22Cr-5Ni-3Mo-N (Alloy UNS S31803) be used for Section III, Division 1, Classes 2 and 3
Forgings, Plate, Bar, Welded and Seamless Pipe, construction, provided the requirements of (a) through
and/or Tube, Fittings, and Fusion Welded Pipe (f) are met:
With Addition of Filler Metal, Classes 2 and 3 (a) Material shall conform to the requirements of
Section III, Division 1 the applicable product specification listed in Table 2.
(b) This material shall be treated as P-No. 10H
Inquiry: Under what rules may 22Cr-5Ni-3Mo-N Group 1.
(Alloy UNS S31803) forgings, plate, bar, welded and (c) The maximum allowable stress values shall be
seamless pipe and/or tube, fittings, and fusion welded those shown in Table 1 of this Case.
pipe with addition of filler metal be used for Section (d) For external pressure, design, use Fig. HA-5 of
III, Division 1, Classes 2 and 3 construction? Section II, Part D.
(e) All other requirements of Section III, Division
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that 22Cr- 1, for Classes 2 and 3 materials shall be met.
5Ni-3Mo-N (Alloy UNS S31803) forgings, plate, bar, (f) This Case number shall be identified on the
welded and seamless pipe and/or tube, fittings, and material manufacturer’s certification for the material.
TABLE 1 TABLE 2
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
E 1108.15 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071008 02-14-00 08:38:57 Rev 15.01
1108.15
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071008 02-14-00 08:38:57 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-636
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE 1
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUES
E 1108.17 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071009 02-14-00 08:39:26 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-636
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
TABLE 2
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
SUPP. 7 — NC 1108.18 E
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071009 02-14-00 08:39:26 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-637
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
E 1108.19 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071010 02-14-00 08:40:02 Rev 15.01
1108.20
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071010 02-14-00 08:40:02 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-638 with this Case, provided the depth of repair in the
Similar and Dissimilar Metal Welding Using base material does not exceed 3⁄8 in.
Ambient Temperature Machine GTAW Temper (d) Prior to welding the area to be welded and a
Bead Technique band around the area of at least 11⁄2 times the component
Section XI, Division 1 thickness or 5 in., whichever is less shall be at least 50°F.
(e) Welding materials shall meet the Owner’s Re-
Inquiry: May the automatic or machine GTAW quirements and the Construction Code and Cases speci-
temper bead technique be used without use of preheat fied in the Repair/Replacement Plan. Welding materials
or postweld heat treatment on Class 1 components? shall be controlled so that they are identified as accept-
able until consumed.
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that repair (f) Peening may be used, except on the initial and
to P-No. 1, 3, except SA-302 Grade B, 12A, 12B, final layers.
and 12C1 material and their associated welds and P-
No. 8 or P-No. 43 material to P-Nos. 1, 3, except
2.0 WELDING QUALIFICATIONS
SA-302 Grade B, 12A, 12B, and 12C1 material and
their associated welds, may be made by the automatic The welding procedures and the welding operators
or machine GTAW temper bead technique without the shall be qualified in accordance with Section IX and
specified preheat or postweld heat treatment of the the requirements of paras. 2.1 and 2.2.
Construction Code, when it is impractical, for opera-
2.1 Procedure Qualification
tional or radiological reasons, to drain the component,
and without the nondestructive examination require- (a) The base materials for the welding procedure
ments of the Construction Code, provided the require- qualification shall be of the same P-Number and Group
ments of paras. 1.0 through 5.0, and all other require- Number, as the materials to be welded. The materials
ments of IWA-40002, are met. shall be postweld heat treated to at least the time and
temperature that was applied to the materials being
welded.
(b) Consideration shall be given to the effects of
1.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS welding in a pressurized environment. If they exist,
(a) The maximum area of an individual weld based they shall be duplicated in the test assembly.
on the finished surface shall be 100 sq. in., and the (c) Consideration shall be given to the effects of
depth of the weld shall not be greater than one-half irradiation on the properties of material, including weld
of the ferritic base metal thickness. material for applications in the core belt line region
(b) Repair/replacement activities on a dissimilar- of the reactor vessel. Special material requirements in
metal weld in accordance with this Case are limited the Design Specification shall also apply to the test
to those along the fusion line of a nonferritic weld to assembly materials for these applications.
ferritic base material on which 1⁄8 in. or less of nonferritic (d) The root width and included angle of the cavity
weld deposit exists above the original fusion line. in the test assembly shall be no greater than the
(c) If a defect penetrates into the ferritic base mate- minimum specified for the repair.
rial, repair of the base material, using a nonferritic (e) The maximum interpass temperature for the first
weld filler material, may be performed in accordance three layers of the test assembly shall be 150°F.
(f) The test assembly cavity depth shall be at least
one-half the depth of the weld to be installed during
1
P-Nos. 12A, 12B, and 12C designations refer to specific material the repair/replacement activity and at least 1 in. The
classifications originally identified in Section III and subsequently
reclassified as P-No. 3 material in a later Edition of Section IX. test assembly thickness shall be at least twice the test
2
IWA-4000 or IWA-7000, as applicable, in the 1989 Edition, with assembly cavity depth. The test assembly shall be large
the 1990 Addenda, and earlier Editions and Addenda. enough to permit removal of the required test specimens.
E 1108.21 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
The test assembly dimensions surrounding the cavity 2.2 Performance Qualification
shall be at least the test assembly thickness and at
Welding operators shall be qualified in accordance
least 6 in. The qualification test plate shall be prepared with Section IX.
in accordance with Fig. 1.
(g) Ferritic base material for the procedure qualifica- 3.0 WELDING PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS
tion test shall meet the impact test requirements of the
The welding procedure shall include the following
Construction Code and Owner’s Requirements. If such requirements.
requirements are not in the Construction Code and (a) The weld metal shall be deposited by the auto-
Owner’s Requirements, the impact properties shall be matic or machine GTAW process.
determined by Charpy V-notch impact tests of the (b) Dissimilar metal welds shall be made using A-
procedure qualification base material at or below the No. 8 weld metal (QW-442) for P-No. 8 to P-No. 1,
lowest service temperature of the item to be repaired. 3, or 12 (A, B, or C) weld joints or F-No. 43 weld
The location and orientation of the test specimens shall metal (QW-432) for P-No. 8 or 43 to P-No. 1, 3, or
be similar to those required in subparagraph (i), but 12 (A, B, or C) weld joints.
shall be in the base metal. (c) The area to be welded shall be buttered with a
(h) Charpy V-notch tests of the ferritic weld metal deposit of at least three layers to achieve at least 1⁄8
of the procedure qualification shall meet the require- in. overlay thickness as shown in Fig. 2, Steps 1
ments as determined in subparagraph (g) above. through 3, with the heat input for each layer controlled
(i) Charpy V-notch tests of the ferritic heat-affected to within ⫾10% of that used in the procedure qualifica-
zone (HAZ) shall be performed at the same temperature tion test. Particular care shall be taken in placement
as the base metal test of subparagraph (g). Number, of the weld layers at the weld toe area of the ferritic
location, and orientation of test specimens shall be as material to ensure that the HAZ and ferritic weld metal
follows: are tempered. Subsequent layers shall be deposited with
(1) The specimens shall be removed from a loca- a heat input not exceeding that used for layers beyond
tion as near as practical to a depth of one-half the the third layer in the procedure qualification. For similar-
thickness of the deposited weld metal. The coupons metal welding, the completed weld shall have at least
one layer of weld reinforcement deposited. This rein-
for HAZ impact specimens shall be taken transverse
forcement shall be removed by mechanical means, so
to the axis of the weld and etched to define the HAZ.
that the finished surface is essentially flush with the
The notch of the Charpy V-notch specimen shall be
surface surrounding the weld (Fig. 3).
cut approximately normal to the material surface in (d) The maximum interpass temperature for field
such a manner as to include as much HAZ as possible applications shall be 350°F regardless of the interpass
in the resulting fracture. When the material thickness temperature during qualification.
permits, the axis of a specimen shall be inclined to (e) Particular care shall be given to ensure that the
allow the root of the notch to be aligned parallel to weld region is free of all potential sources of hydrogen.
the fusion line. The surfaces to be welded, filler metal, and shielding
(2) If the test material is in the form of a plate gas shall be suitably controlled.
or a forging, the axis of the weld shall be oriented
parallel to the principal direction of rolling or forging. 4.0 EXAMINATION
(3) The Charpy V-notch test shall be performed (a) Prior to welding, a surface examination shall be
in accordance with SA-370. Specimens shall be in performed on the area to be welded.
accordance with SA-370, Fig. 11, Type A. The test (b) The final weld surface and the band around the
shall consist of a set of three full-size 10 mm × 10 area defined in para. 1.0(d) shall be examined using
mm specimens. The lateral expansion, percent shear, a surface and ultrasonic methods when the completed
absorbed energy, test temperature, orientation and loca- weld has been at ambient temperature for at least 48
tion of all test specimens shall be reported in the hours. The ultrasonic examination shall be in accordance
Procedure Qualification Record. with Appendix I.3
(j) The average values of the three HAZ impact
tests shall be equal to or greater than the average 3
Refer to the 1989 Edition with the 1989 Addenda and later Editions
values of the three unaffected base metal tests. and Addenda.
SUPP. 7 — NC 1108.22 E
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
E 1108.23 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
5.0 DOCUMENTATION
Use of this Case shall be documented on Form NIS-2.
SUPP. 7 — NC 1108.24 E
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
E 1108.25 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE (continued)
N-638
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
SUPP. 7 — NC 1108.26 E
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071011 02-14-00 08:41:11 Rev 15.01
CASE
N-639
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Case N-639
Alternative Calibration Block Material
Section XI, Division 1
E 1108.27 SUPP. 7 — NC
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071012 02-14-00 08:44:56 Rev 15.01
1108.28
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071012 02-14-00 08:44:56 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 1129
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071013 01-25-00 08:42:22 Rev 15.01
SUPP. 5 — NC 1130
SUPP. #6 Asme Nuclear Code Cases 1998 NC98071013 01-25-00 08:42:22 Rev 15.01