Mandatory Edition and Addenda means: WHAT? 1

[pvesseleng]

According to ASME B&PVC is it permitted to use old edition and addenda?
Lets say that now on 21st of February 2006, we are signing a contract for boiler according to ASME B&PVC Section I.
1) What would be the mandatory code edition and addenda?
2) If client says that this boiler shall be made according to 2001 Edition, is it permitted to certify MDR according to 2001 Edition without considering the current code mandatory edition and addenda requirements?

Regards,

 

[deltaman43]

I'd check reqmts of the local jurisdiction as they may dictate specific Code editions/addenda. (see Synopsis of Boiler & Pressure Vessel Laws, available from the National Board)

Any locality reqmt would of course take precedence over any Code.

Normally you'd use the latest Code edition/addenda in effect. However, the locality or client reqmt. is the dictate, in my opinion.

j.

 

[deanc]

Check with your AIA. You have to get them to buy off anyway.

 

[DSB123]

pvesseleng,
Good question. However if you think about large sized Projects which take several years from inception to completion. If for example the Design Code is specified in the Contract as the "curent edition" then at the Contract award the Vendor should be using the latest Code, however by the end of the Contract (or even during the Contract) a new edition may be released. You would not really expect the Vendor to check his design again to the newly issued Code would you. My belief is that it is the present Code at the Contract award.

 

[pvesseleng]

DSB123
My belief is laso same with you.
USER shall designate the edition and addenda as per ASME Section VIII Div.2 AG-301.1 (d)
In the mean time signing the contract with USER and Contractor mandatory edition and addenda shall be defined.
if several years later or immediately contractor may subcontract pressure vessel to the Vessel Manufacturer, in this case Contractor shall inform the Vessel Manufacturer about code edition and addenda.
only remaining guestion is:
by the mean time signing contract between User and Contractor; is it permitted to define earlier edition and addenda?

 

[vpl]

Presenting a bit of a different view:

For U.S. nuclear plants, there is a specific "Code of Record" for the plant, which means that the plant was licensed as being in compliance with a certain edition and addenda of the Code. Changes to the plant, or modifications, could be required to be to the specified Code of Record, even though newer versions of the Code are available. Alternatively, the designer might be required to do a "Code reconciliation" to show why using the newer code would meet or exceed the licensed basis.

Additionally, NRC has not always approved the latest version of the Code for use in nuclear applications. There a designer might not be permitted to use that Code at all.

Finally, for nuclear applications in the portion of the plant which is deemed "safety-related", the NRC regulations take precedence over local requirements. (Personally, I would question a local requirement that takes precedence over the ASME Code, unless the requirement was in a more conservative direction.)


Patricia Lougheed

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

 

[deltaman43]

Regarding 'questioning' the local jurisdiction, you may, & maybe you should. Contact info for the Chief Inspector of any particular state may be found in the "Synopsis of B&PV LAWS" (emphasis on that last word) published by NBIC.

Codes or standards in themselves are not laws. Individual states establish laws regarding pressurized equipment. As for the NRC, I'm sure any state B&PV laws are established in conjunction w/ NRC.

Check it out. Any good engr. will do this as routine practice on each new project.

 

[ekschwab]

VPL,

I am dealing with that exact same point of view. We are currently doing design work for the next generation nuclear plant. Our plant’s Design Certification (as approved by the NRC) is based on ASME 1998 edition through 2000 addenda.

I posted the question below about code reconciliation, knowing that by time we are ready to actually purchase equipment and start construction there will be later code editions (there already are). I was curious how others deal with that. If we use a later code, we will have to show that nothing has been “weakened” and is either the same or better by a review and reconciliation process per NCA-3554. We will also have to get approval from the NRC if we use anything later. A revision or addenda to the Design Cert Report will be required. In the case of nuclear plants the NRC trumps everyone else (local, state, and for that matter ASME).

I am finding that equipment suppliers/manufacturers often design and build to earlier editions of the code. It seems one of the biggest issues is materials. Oftentimes materials are spec’d that were not in the earlier code editions.

 

[deanc]

Closely read the Foreward in your Code books,esp. for material.

Talk to your AIA----you must be in agreement.

 

[LSThill]

Technical Note:

ASME SECTION VIII Div. 2 is in final draft for up comming release.

as Reported by Kam in meeting Houston February 22-24, 2006

Please review the following
code case
2211
2235
2168
2268
2260
2150
2310
2243
2286
N284

WRC
335
444
435
406
368
501

FSI
FLUID STRUCTURAL INTERACTION

PRA (ASME DRAFT)
PROBLE RICK ANALYSIS

ASME TECHNICAL PROBLEM RULE:
SOFT CONVERSION (25.4) soft.
HARD CONVERSION (25.0) hard