Completed unstamped vessel recovered from bankruptcy

[eyec]

there is a Sec. VIII Div 2 vessel that was partially fabricated in the shop, final assembled on-site and hydroed.
the MDR was completed and ready to be delivered but before the U Stamp and NB# was stamped on the nameplate and registered the customer went bankrupt and did not pay for the vessel. hence the U Stamp and NB# was never placed on the vessel nameplate!

another company has purchased the facility where the vessel resides and wants to put it into operation and reimburse the fabricator for the previous facility owner's outstanding debt.

i have checked with jurisdictional authorities in the State where the vessel was partially fabricated, the State where the vessel resides, the NBIC, and the fabricator's AI. everything needed is paperwork and does not present a problem.

now, does anyone know if there are any ASME requirements that need to be met in order to place the U Stamp and NB# on the nameplate (other than administrative paperwork)?

Steven C
Senior Member
ThirdPartyInspections.com

 

[metengr]

No, just a complete paperwork trail that can be verified by the AIA and signed.

 

[eyec]

thanks, AIA has already signed everything - 2 years ago!

but that is what I am finding from all of the other jurisdictional bodies.

Steven C
Senior Member
ThirdPartyInspections.com

 

[CodeRef]

How hard can this be? The Manufacturer who fabricated the vessel never went out of business. right? If all that is missing is an ASME nameplate, what is the issue? A lost nameplate?

FAQ731-376

 

[GenB]

I understand the vessel was never stamped.
If you are the original Mfr and you still have the same AI, just ask the inspector for a continuation on the same vessel.
If you have a different inspector you may have a problem.
but if the orig. inspector is still available with the same agecy you can request to the agency and it can be stamped provided all docs are in order.
genblr

 

[eyec]

thanks for the answers. i was really trying to find out if there was an engineering requirement for inspection and there does not seem to be one.

therefore, it is just a paperwork issue and no problem jurisdictionally.


Steven C
Senior Member
ThirdPartyInspections.com

 

[GenB]

there are some minor eng requirement you've probably can handdle well or your AI can help on that.

 

[eyec]

GenB,

what minor eng requirement?

the vessel was fabricated, installed, and tested all according to Code and all signatures/sign-offs were performed from start to finish.

basically, all that would have to be done is the AI witness the fabricator's representative physically Stamp the vessel.

Steven C
Senior Member
ThirdPartyInspections.com

 

[GenB]

hydro and data report go hand on hand same date. your AI can be in trouble if the data do not match the hydro. If you AI wants to help''
he can by re-hydro else he will be liable for the documentation if something bad ever happen to the vessel and integrityn is questioned.
year of mfg is in conflict here, year of Code and Add.
if this is a shop mfd vessel how will you address the field if the vessel is already installed unless you have field authoriz.
good luck.

 

[eyec]

question resolved.

paperwork only required; everything else completed iaw jurisdictional requirements.

thanks all.

Steven C
Senior Member
ThirdPartyInspections.com

 

[racookpe1978]

Check the condition of the unit BEFORE putting the paperwork through: Rust outside, pockets of standing water inside after two years, crushed/damaged brackets or supports.

Condition of bolts and studs. The paperwork only certifies how it was made and by who(m), not the current actual condition.

 

[GenB]

I am still doubt then AI will fall for this one! only my opinion. If I was the AI I would dig it up throughrely
before getting in trouble with the NB