Print This Page


1995 Interpretations

Print Date: 12/13/2017 2:51:26 PM

INTERPRETATION 95-57

Subject: RB-3238(e) Above Ground Vessels

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question 1: Does the interval of the lesser of five (5) years or 1/4 life refer only to an initial external inspection?

Reply 1: No.

Question 2: Does the NBIC establish an inspection interval for periodic external examinations?

Reply 2: Yes. The external inspection interval is defined in RB-3238 (e) & (f) with remaining life calculated as per RB-3236.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-56

Subject: RA-2231 (b)(1) Acceptance of Code Cases 1923 and 1945 when used in Original Construction

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question: Under the provisions of paragraph RA-2231 (b)(1), is it permissible for a "VR" stampholder to repair a restricted lift valve when ASME Code Case 1923-2 or 1945-3 was used in the original construction?

Reply: Yes, provided no change is made in valve lift.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-55

Subject: RB-3550 Operational Inspection

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question: Under the provisions of paragraph RB-3550, may a repair organization that meets the requirements of RA-2220 act as the designee of a pressure vessel user to make adjustments to a steam service pressure relief valve with air as the test media, provided that:

  1. the jurisdiction has authorized such adjustments;
  2. no “VR” Symbol is applied to the pressure relief valve?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-54

Subject: RC-2050 Pressure Testing

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question: In accordance with RC-1130, is it required that the inspector witness any pressure test of a repair or alteration?

Reply: Yes, except as provided by RC-2031 (b).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-53

Subject: RD-2031 Routine Repairs

1995 Edition

Question 1: Is the addition of a nozzle penetrating through a head or shell considered a routine repair?

Reply 1: No.

Question 2: Is a pipe nozzle that penetrates a head or shell considered a section of pipe used in RC-2031?

Reply 2: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-52

Subject: RD-2060 Patches, Figure 8

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question 1: Is there a maximum length-to-width ratio for the tube window patch configuration?

Reply 1: No, the NBIC does not specify dimensions for the patch.

Question 2: Is there a maximum dimension allowed for the tube window patch?

Reply 2: No, the NBIC does not specify dimensions for the patch.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-51

Subject: RC-1090

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question: May an "R" Certificate Holder use weld procedures and welders qualified by a technically competent group or agency?

Reply: Yes, as permitted by RC-1092 or when allowed by the original code of construction.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-50

Subject: RC-2072 and RC-3052

1995 Edition with the 1996 Addendum

Question: Does the term “attachment” as used in RC-2072 and RC-3052 refer to Material Test Reports?

Reply: No, the term applies to R-3, R-4 and Manufacturer’s Partial Data Reports.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-49

Subject: Appendix 6, B-17

1995 Edition

Question: Does the example of a repair given in Appendix 6, paragraph B-17 apply only to material changes within a single P number?

Reply: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-48

Subject: RC-1020, RB-1050(a) & Appendix 6, B-6

1995 Edition

Question 1: May retubing and testing a boiler whose original code of construction is ASME Section IV be documented on an R-1 if the replacement tubes are expanded as permitted in ASME Section IV, HG-360.2?

Reply 1: Yes, provided all applicable requirements of the NBIC are met.

Question 2: May repairs to saddles, frames or supports of pressure vessels be documented on an R-1?

Reply 2: Yes, provided all applicable requirements of the NBIC are met.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-47

Subject: RB-4020

1995 Edition

Question: When replacing a nameplate, may the National Board number be stamped on the replacement nameplate by the original manufacturer when the manufacturer no longer holds an ASME Certificate of Authorization?

Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of RB-4000 are met.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-46

Subject: Appendix 6, B-7

1995 Edition

Question 1: May the example of a repair given in Appendix 6, paragraph B-7 apply to a nozzle or an opening for which the axis is not perpendicular to the wall or head of a pressure-retaining item?

Reply 1: Yes, provided calculations to determine availability of reinforcement (compensation) for such construction is not a consideration of the original code of construction.

Question 2: May the example of a repair given in Appendix 6, paragraph B-7 apply to nozzles and openings larger than NPS 3?

Reply 2: Yes, provided calculations to determine availability of reinforcement (compensation) for such construction is not a consideration of the original code of construction.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-45

Subject: Appendix 4
               Definition of Repair

1995 Edition

Question 1: Providing there is no work performed on pressure-retaining items, is the removal of a coal grate, installation of new burners, brick wall modifications, and concrete and refractory work outside the scope of the NBIC?

Reply 1: Yes, provided the required safety or safety relief valve relieving capacity is not increased.

Question 2: In a high temperature water boiler, is an increase in the maximum design output in Btu/hr, which requires an increase in the safety relief valve relieving capacity considered an alteration in accordance with the NBIC?

Reply 2: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-44

Subject: Appendix 6, Item C-5
               Examples of Alterations

1995 Edition

Question: For a boiler stamped in accordance with the ASME Code, Section I, is it the intent of Appendix 6, paragraph C.5 that an increase in heating surface be considered an alteration only when the resulting change requires an increase in the relieving capacity of the safety valves?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-43

Subject: Appendix 5, Definition of Repair

1995 Edition

Question: May the welding of a new circumferential seam in a completed, code stamped and certified ASME Code pressure vessel be classified as a repair?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-42

Subject: RC-2070 Documentation
              RC-3050 Documentation

1995 Edition

Question: When work classified as an alteration is performed in conjunction with work on the same pressure-retaining item classified as a repair, do both Form R-1 and Form R-2 need to be prepared?

Reply: No, as long as the repair work is identified on Form R-2 along with the alteration work.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-41

Subject: RC-1110 Nondestructive Examination

1995 Edition

Question 1: When performing in-service inspection, radiographic examination uncovers indications in welds made by the original manufacturer that are in excess of that allowed by the original code of construction. Is it a requirement that these welds be repaired?

Reply 1: The decision as to whether or not to perform a repair of deficiencies discovered during in-service inspection is outside the scope of the Code. See RB-3280.

Question 2: When nondestructive examination of a repair weld reveals indications in excess of that allowed by the original code of construction, must the indication be removed or reduced to an acceptable size?

Reply 2: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-40

Subject: Appendix 5, Form R-2 Report of Alteration

1995 Edition

Question 1: Does the NBIC require that the Data Report Forms used to report repairs and alterations be identical to the forms shown in Appendix 5?

Reply 1: Yes.

Question 2: May the Data Report Forms used for repairs and alterations be computer generated?

Reply 2: Yes, provided they are identical to the forms shown in Appendix 5.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-39

Subject: RC-2050 Pressure Testing

1995 Edition

Question: Is the performance of a pressure test in accordance with RC-2050(a) required after a routine repair?

Reply: Yes, except as permitted by RC-2050(g).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-38

Subject: RB-3234 Pressure Testing

1995 Edition

Question: Does RB-3234 allow for an in-service pressure test in excess of 1-1/2 times the MAWP adjusted for temperature?

Reply: No, where any provision of the NBIC presents a direct or implied conflict with any regulation, the jurisdictional regulation shall govern. However, in these circumstances, the activity cannot be documented as meeting the requirements of the NBIC.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-37

Withdrawn

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-36

Subject: RC-1020 Construction Standards

1995 Edition

Question: When work is performed under the NBIC to a code other than the original code of construction, is it required that the work be classified as an alteration?

Reply: No, see RC-1020. The use of a different design basis code does not necessarily require work to be classified as an alteration; however, the concurrence of the Inspector and the jurisdiction is required for this determination.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-35

Subject: R-200 Definition of Terms

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: Is the welding in of a plug to seal tubes in a boiler or pressure vessel considered a repair?

Reply 1: Yes.

Question 2: Does the NBIC apply to plugging tubes by welding plugs to tubes and/or their joints to tube sheets of tubes that have leaked, tubes that have corroded to an unacceptable thin wall thickness, and tubes required to be removed from service for operating reasons in boilers and pressure vessels?

Reply 2: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-34

Subject: Appendix 4, Definition of an Authorized Inspection Agency

1995 Edition

Question 1: In Appendix 4, the definition of an Authorized Inspection Agency refers to the National Board Rules and Regulations. If an Inspector is assigned to a shop that only holds an "R" Certificate of Authorization and performs inspections of repairs and alterations to pressure-retaining items, is the Authorized Inspector Supervisor required to audit the performance of the Inspector as specified in 3.4.3.(d) of the National Board Rules and Regulations?

Reply 1: No.

Question 2: In Appendix 4, the definition of an Authorized Inspection Agency refers to the National Board Rules and Regulations. If an Inspector is assigned to a shop that only holds an “R” Certificate of Authorization and performs inspections of repairs and alterations to pressure-retaining items, is the Inspector required to monitor the quality program?

Reply 2: No; however, the Inspector shall assure compliance with the requirements of the NBIC. See RC-1130.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-33(a)

Subject: Appendix C-R, 4.0 (f)

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: May an “R” Certificate of Authorization holder with field repair in the scope of its “R” Certificate perform repairs and alterations in other shops owned by the Certificate Holder?

Reply: No. Each shop must have its own certificate.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-33

Subject: RC-2031(a)(2) Definition of “non-load bearing”

1995 Edition

Question: Does the NBIC specify a quantitative value below which an attachment is considered non-load bearing?

Reply: No, “non-load bearing attachment” is a generally accepted design term referring to items that transmit an inconsequential load onto the pressure retaining boundary.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-32

Subject: RC-2050 Pressure Testing

1995 Edition

Question: In RC-2050(a), does the expression “shall be pressure tested at 80% of the maximum allowable working pressure stamped on the pressure-retaining item or operating pressure, whichever is greater” mean not less than the greater of 80% of the maximum allowable working pressure or the operating pressure?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-31

Subject: RC-2031 Routine Repairs

1995 Edition

Question: Do the provisions in RC-2031(b) for waiving the inprocess involvement of the Inspector on routine repairs include waiving the requirement for the Inspector to witness a pressure test as addressed in RC-1130?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-30

Subject: Data Report Forms

1995 Edition

Question 1: May repairs or alterations performed in accordance with the requirements of API-510 be documented on NBIC forms R-1 or R-2?

Reply 1: No.

Question 2: May repairs or alterations performed in accordance with the requirements of API-510 be accepted by the Inspector?

Reply 2: This is outside the scope of the NBIC.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-29

Subject: RC-1070 Inspector

1995 Edition

Question: Is it the intent of the NBIC that a jurisdiction as defined in Appendix 4 which is not a member of the National Board, employ inspectors for inspection of repairs and alterations as referenced in RC-1070(a)?

Reply: Yes, RC-1070(a) does not restrict the jurisdiction to only National Board Members.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-28

Subject: RC-2031 Routine Repairs

1995 Edition

Question: Do the provisions in RC-2031(a) for waiving the inprocess involvement of the inspector on routine repairs include waiving the requirement for the inspector to sign the Form R-1 as addressed in RC-2071(b)?

Reply: No. The requirements of RC-2071(b) are applicable for all repairs, including routine repairs. See RC-2031(d).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-27

Subject: RC-2031 Routing Repairs
              RC-2050 Pressure Testing
              RC-2060 Stamping
              RC-2072 Distribution

1995 Edition

Question 1: May the repair of cracks or pinholes be considered a routine repair?

Reply 1: The scope of routine repairs are defined in RC-2031. The nature of the defect is not a criteria for determining whether the repair is routine.

Question 2: Is the registration of R-1 forms an option?

Reply 2: Yes, see RC-2072. However, the jurisdiction may require registration (RC-1150).

Question 3: May the "R" Symbol Stamp be applied to a repaired item whether or not the R1 form is registered with the National Board?

Reply 3: Yes, provided all of the requirements of the NBIC are met. See RC-2060.

Question 4: Who is responsible for determining whether or not it is practical to perform a pressure test of a repaired item?

Reply 4: The "R" Certificate Holder. See RC-2050(a).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-26

Subject: RA-2262 Nameplate Contents,

1995 Edition

Question: Is it the intent of RA-2262 (NB-65, paragraph 9.2(a)) that the capacity and type model number be included on the valve repair nameplate only when this information has been changed?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-25

Subject: Appendix 5, Form R-1

1995 Edition

Question: Is it required that the inspector perform a physical inspection of routine repairs to enable completion of the Certificate of Inspection block on Form R-1?

Reply: No. When the Remarks section of Form R-1 includes the Statement “Routine Repairs” in accordance with RC-2031(d), it is understood that the inspection signed for by the inspector is a document review and that a physical inspection may not have been performed.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-24

Subject: Appendix 2

1995 Edition

Question 1: Are nameplates required to have the same layout as the figures shown in Appendix 2?

Reply 1: No. However, all information shown in the figures must be included on the stamping or nameplate and the National Board Certificate number must appear directly below the symbol stamp.

Question 2: Are the instructions (MAWP, ° F, etc.) shown in the figures in Appendix 2 required to be included on the stamping or nameplate?

Reply 2: Yes. However, the words “Certificate Holder” and “National Board "R" Certificate Number” may be omitted.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-23

Subject: RC-1010 Scope

1995 Edition

Question: May repairs to cargo containers that are designed to ASME Section VIII, Division 1 but are not stamped with the “U” Symbol be documented on the form R-1, if the repair facility maintains the National Board "R" Symbol?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-22

Subject: RC-3020 Design, RC-3021 Calculations

1995 Edition

Question: May the rules of RC-3020 and RC-3021 be followed to reclassify a vessel originally constructed to ASME, Section III, to ASME, Section VIII?

Reply: No. The NBIC does not provide rules for reclassification of pressureretaining items.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-21

Subject: Appendix 4, Definition of Alteration

1995 Edition

Question: May an ASME Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel that has postweld heat treatment reported on an ASME Manufacturer’s Data Report, be repaired by welding without subsequent postweld heat treatment or postweld heat treatment alternatives?

Reply: No. This is an alteration.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-20

Subject: Foreword

1995 Edition

Question: May the requirements of an earlier Edition and Addenda of the NBIC be used when performing a repair or alteration?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-19

Subject: RC-1000 General Requirements

1995 Edition

Question: When the NBIC references “the original code of construction,” is it required to use the edition and addenda of that code as used for construction?

Reply: No. The term “original code of construction” refers to the document itself, not the edition/addenda of the document. Repairs and alterations may be performed to the edition/addenda used for the original construction or a later edition/addenda most applicable to the work.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-18

Subject: Appendix C-NR, NR-1000 Scope and Applicability

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: Is it a requirement of the NBIC that the rules of Appendix C-NR be applied to any repair or modification performed on an ASME Section III N-Stamped item, even though the installed item is not located in a Class 1, 2, or 3 system within the ASME Section XI Program boundaries established by the Owner in accordance with regulatory safety system classification so as to maintain its ASME Section III Code integrity?

Reply 1: No. The rules of Appendix C-NR are not required for repairs or modifications to ASME Section III items installed outside of ASME Section XI system boundaries.

Question 2: Is it a requirement of the NBIC that any work performed on an item prior to its installation in a Class 1, 2, or 3 system within the ASME Section XI Program be performed under the rules of Appendix C-NR?

Reply 2: Yes. Upon completion of the construction Code, any repairs or modifications of an item intended for service in an ASME Section XI system must be performed under the rules of Appendix C-NR to maintain the Code integrity of the item.

Question 3: Is it permissible for the owner to reuse an ASME Section III N-Stamped item that was installed in a location not within the ASME Section XI Class 1, 2, or 3 system, provided all work performed on the item was in accordance with the rules of Appendix C-NR?

Reply 3: Yes. Under the described conditions, the Code integrity would be maintained for possible reuse of the item in an ASME Section XI Class 1, 2, or 3 system application.

Question 4: Under the requirements of Appendix C-NR, is it permissible for the owner to reuse an ASME Section III N-Stamped item that was installed in a location not within the ASME Section XI Class 1, 2, or 3 system even though work had been performed on the item outside the rules of Appendix C-NR?

Reply 4: No. An item on which repair or modification activities have been performed outside of the rules of Appendix C-NR may not be subsequently used in an application which requires compliance with the rules of Appendix C-NR.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-17

Subject: R-404 Authorization of Organizations Making Repairs

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: Is it the intent of the NBIC to permit documented repairs (Form R-1) regardless of whether documented or undocumented repairs have been performed in the past?

Reply 1: Yes, provided the original construction was to the ASME Code.

Question 2: When an "R" Certificate Holder performs a repair on a vessel, does the Certificate Holder assume responsibility for the work performed by others on the vessel?

Reply 2: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-16

Subject: R-302.1 Welding Procedure Specifications

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: Is it permissible for a repair organization to carry out repairs using qualified weld procedure specifications supplied by an owner-user of the boiler, pressure vessel or piping to be repaired?

Reply: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-15

Subject: R-307 Replacement of Pressure Parts

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: Is it permissible to use an assembly from an inservice pressure vessel as a replacement part for the repair/alteration of a second vessel?

Reply: Yes, provided the intended repair/alteration has the concurrence of the jurisdiction and the Authorized Inspection Agency.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-14

Subject: R-202 Alteration

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: May a welded repair to a pressure vessel be performed without postweld heat treatment or acceptable alternative to postweld heat treatment, when the pressure vessel as reported on the data report was postweld heat treated during construction?

Reply: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-13

Subject: U-106 Maximum Period Between Inspections

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: Does Chapter V mandate the type of inspection to be performed?

Reply 1: No. The type of inspection (internal, external, NDE, etc.) is established by the owner-user and the Inspector provided the inspection method provides sufficient information to determine if the vessel can be safely operated.

Question 2: In accordance with paragraph U-106, may a “complete on-stream evaluation of pressure vessels” be performed in lieu of an internal inspection?

Reply 2: Yes.

Question 3: U-106(c) states that under specific circumstances and when the corrosion rate is known to be zero a vessel need not be internally inspected. Does this mean that an internal inspection is required when the corrosion rate is not zero?

Reply 3: U-106(c) provides guidance for a specific situation. The requirements of U-106(c) are not related to the requirements of U-106(b).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-12

Subject: U-107 Inspection for Corrosion and Other Deterioration

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: May the provisions of U-107 Inspection for Corrosion and Other Deterioration of the 1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda of the NBIC be applied to a vessel of any size?

Reply 1: Yes, provided the owner-user’s inspection program has been approved by the jurisdiction.

Question 2: When applying U-107(b) in question 1, may any of the readings taken along the length of the properly oriented line (circumferential or longitudinal) be less than the required thickness for pressure?

Reply 2: Yes, as long as the average of the readings taken along the line is equal to or greater than the required thickness for pressure.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-11

Subject: R-503 Re-rating a Boiler or Pressure Vessel

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: Do the rules of the NBIC permit the re-rating of a complete boiler or pressure vessel to a higher MAWP by removing existing weld seams, reweld seams, performing radiography and recalculating using a higher joint efficiency?

Reply: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-10

Subject: R-301.2.2 Owner-User Acceptance Inspection of Repairs

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question 1: May an Owner-User obtain an "R" Certificate of Authorization?

Reply 1: Yes.

Question 2: May repairs performed by the Owner-User holding an "R" Certificate of Authorization be inspected by Owner-User Commissioned Inspectors?

Reply 2: Yes.

Question 3: May acceptance inspections of alterations be performed by Owner-User Commissioned Inspectors?

Reply 3: No. Acceptance inspections for alterations must be performed by an Inspector employed by an Authorized Inspection Agency (insurance company or jurisdiction).

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-09

Subject: Chapter III, Supplement 3 Welding Methods as an Alternative to Postweld Heat Treatment

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: Is it the intent of the 1994 Addendum to the NBIC to prohibit the use of “controlled preheat” as an alternative method of postweld heat treatment in the repair of pressure vessels?

Reply: Method 1 as shown in the 1992 Edition was inadvertently omitted from the 1994 addendum. The omission should be considered an errata.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-08

Subject: Appendix C-R, Guide for Completing Form R-1, Report of Welded Repair or Alteration

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: For instruction 13 of the guide for completing Form R-1, is a manufacturer’s serial number acceptable for “stamped identification?”

Reply: Noting the manufacturer’s serial number is one acceptable method to address “stamped identification.”

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-07

Subject: Appendix C-R, 3.0 Administrative Procedures

1992 Edition with the 1994 Addendum

Question: May a renewed "R" Certificate of Authorization be issued based upon a manual review of an “N” type Certificate of Authorization?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-06

Subject: R-401.2.2 Access Openings

1992 Edition with the 1993 Addendum

Question: May a fillet welded patch plate be installed as a repair?

Reply: No.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-05

Subject: Purpose and Scope of the NBIC

1992 Edition with the 1993 Addendum

Question: At what point following the completion of a new power boiler, heating boiler or pressure vessel may the NBIC be used?

Reply: When all requirements of the construction code have been met.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-04

Subject: U-107 Inspection for Corrosion and Other Deterioration

1992 Edition with the 1993 Addendum

Question: Is U-107(b) applicable to areas that have wall loss resulting from grinding?

Reply: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-03

Subject: R-200 Definition of Terms
              R-404 Authorization of Organizations Making Repairs
              R-505 Authorization of Organizations Making Alterations

1992 Edition with the 1993 Addendum

Question 1: An inservice ASME stamped pressure vessel manufactured to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1, has its shell diameter turned down below original tolerances. The diameter is then built back up by fusion welding using weld metal having a chemical composition and tensile strength similar to that of the base metal, only to be remachined back to its original tolerances. This is done to provide more wear resistance and also to extend the useful life of the vessel. Is this procedure considered a repair?

Reply 1: Yes.

Question 2: Is the procedure specified in Question (1) considered an alteration if the weld metal has a chemical composition and tensile strength that are not similar to that of the base metal?

Reply 2: Yes.
Question 3: In order to perform the procedures specified in Questions 1 and 2 above to ASME Code vessels and maintain their integrity, in accordance with the NBIC is it required that the organization performing the work hold an “R” Certificate?

Reply 3: Yes.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-02

Subject: R-307 Replacement Parts

1992 Edition with the 1993 Addendum

Question: When a material change has been specified by the owner for a replacement tube bundle, altered to upgrade the performance, which will be installed into an existing heat exchanger shell by mechanical means (no welding), is Form R1, Report of Welded Repair or Alteration, required by R-307.1(c) necessary in addition to the manufacturer’s partial data report supplied by the parts manufacturer?

Reply: Yes. The organization, in possession of a valid Certificate of Authorization for the use of the “R” symbol stamp, that installs the part and affixes the nameplate is responsible for completing the R-1 form.

Back to Index


 

INTERPRETATION 95-01

Subject: Application of the NBIC All Editions

Question: In applying the rules of the NBIC, what edition of the NBIC governs the inspection of a pressure vessel that was built prior to the latest edition of the Code?

Reply: The laws/regulations of the jurisdiction in which the object is located specify which edition of the Code applies to the object. If there is no jurisdiction, the latest edition is applicable.

Back to Index