ML23291A337

Final Rule: Annotated Public Comments, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases RG 1.84 Rev 40, RG 1.147 Rev 21, RG 1.192 Rev 5, and Revision of Inservice Inspection and Inservice Testing Code of Record Frequency Update

ML23291A337
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/28/2023
From:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
To:
References
NRC-2018-0291, RIN 3150-AK23
Download: ML23291A337 (1)

Text

4/28/23, 2:35 PM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/f0bc47d4-1795-483c-be26-c8ef9ecc6e10

As of: 4/28/23, 2:34 PM Received: April 28, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lh0-j3si-5d4y 0/ $ Comments Due: May 05, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency (Rev. 40)

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0002 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0014 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-03742

Submitter Information

Organization: Nuclear Energy Institute

General Comment

See attached file(s)

Attachments

04-04-23_NRC_DG-1406_resub

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/f0bc47d4-1795-483c-be26-c8ef9ecc6e10 1/1 MARK A. RICHTER, PH.D.

Technical Advisor, Decommissioning & Used Fuel

1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8106 mar@nei.org nei.org

April 4, 2023

Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff

Submitted on Regulations.gov

Subject:

NEI Comments Regarding NRC Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406 Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1 (Docket ID NRC-2018-0291)

Project Number: 689

Dear Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff:

On behalf of the Nuclear Energy Institutes (NEI) 1 members (hereinafter referred to as industry), we are grateful for the opportunity to review and offer comments regarding NRC Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1, (Docket ID NRC-2018-0291.)

This regulatory guide lists the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel (BPV) Code,Section XI, Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components Code Cases, that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved for use as voluntary alternatives to the mandatory ASME BPV Code provisions that are incorporated by reference into Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities.

Specifically, the proposed revision to Regulatory Guide 1.147 includes N-860 as an approved code case.

As noted in Table 1 of DG-1406, Code Case N-860 is fully accepted as written. Also, Regulatory Guide 1-1 1.147, written for reactor licenses, has not been revised to incorporate applicability to ISFSI licenses.

Under applicability it states that the RG applies to reactor licensees and applicants subject to 10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.55a, Codes and Standards.

1 The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of ge neric operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff April 4, 2023 Page 2

NEI offers one specific comment on DG-1406, suggesting that clarification be included that addresses applicability of Code Case N-860 to 10 CFR Part 72, Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations.

Thank you for your time and consideration of the suggested clarification. If you have any questions, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Richter 4/19/23, 8:22 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/8fa9f558-c922-42ff-9b2a-ae35e2589541

As of: 4/19/23, 8:21 AM Received: April 18, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lgm-nmwm-45xq Comments Due: May 05, 2023 0/ $ Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases, Revison 40

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0002 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0013 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-03742

Submitter Information

Name: Patrick O'Regan Address: United States, Email: poregan@comcast.net

General Comment

It is recommended that NRC extended the comment period by one to two months from the May 5, 2023 2-1 date. ASME Boiler Code week is the week of May 7th and most meetings will be in person. This extension will allow time for the various supporting groups (working groups, subgroups) as well asSection XI Standards Committee to discuss any outstanding issues in person.

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/8fa9f558-c922-42ff-9b2a-ae35e2589541 1/1 4/19/23, 8:18 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/e95393be-8255-4dbb-94da-9a3fca649d3e

As of: 4/19/23, 8:18 AM Received: April 18, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lgm-5jrn-0vwo 0/ $ Comments Due: May 05, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases, Revison 40

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0002 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0012 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-03742

Submitter Information

Name: Mark Ferlisi Address:

Charlotte, NC, 28270-1354 Email: mark.ferlisi@gses.com

General Comment

3-1 I believe that it would be very helpful if the NRC would extend the public comment period by an additional four weeks to allow ASME committee members to discuss new and revised conditions on the use of Section III and Section XI Code Cases during committee meetings scheduled during the week of May 14, 2023.

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/e95393be-8255-4dbb-94da-9a3fca649d3e 1/1 0/ $

From: Kevin Hall To: RulemakingComments Resource

Subject:

[External_Sender] Docket ID NRC-2018-0291 Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:06:55 PM Attachments: Kevin Hall Docket ID NRC-2018-0291 Rulemaking comment.pdf

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule. Attached is my comment.

Thanks

Kevin Hall Division Manager Iddeal Solutions 601-572-9678

Notice: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please notify the sender and permanently delete all correspondence. Any email content containing defamatory or offensive statements or infringements of any legal rights, is expressly prohibited by Company policy and therefore no liability is accepted in respect of such communications Kevin Hall Comment on Docket ID NRC-2018-0291

As part of this action the Staff is changing 10 CFR 50.55a paragraphs necessary to allow a Code of Record Update every 20 - 25 years. These changes also included making conforming and clarifying changes to address issues encountered during the development of this proposed rule.

However, there are two locations in 10 CFR 50.55a that are not included that would streamline this effort, 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and 10 CFR 50.55a (g)(4)(iv).

10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) requires that:

4-1 Use of later Code editions and addenda. Inservice tests of pumps and valves may meet the requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (a)(1)(iv) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section, and subject to NRC approval. Portions of editions or addenda may be used, provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda are met.

10 CFR 50.55a (g)(4)(iv) require that:

Applicable ISI Code: Use of subsequent Code editions and addenda. Inservice examination of components and system pressure tests may meet the requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section, and subject to Commission approval. Portions of editions or addenda may be used, provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda are met.

NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2004-12 Clarification on Use of Later Editions and Addenda to the ASME OM Code and Section XI was issued July 28, 2004. This RIS was issued because the staff had identified several instances in which nuclear power plants licensees had used portions of editions and addenda of the OM Code and/or the B&PV Code issued after their Code of Record without requesting approval from the Commission. The licensees had reasoned that if the edition and addenda was incorporated in 10 CFR 50.55a then it had NRC approval.

However the Staff stated that The fact that these Code editions and addenda have been incorporated by reference into the regulations does not imply that Commission approval has already been given. Licensees must request approval to use later Code editions and addenda via a letter to the NRC; they may not just update their IST or ISI program.

In the summary of Issue for RIS 2004-12 the staff states the licensees are not required to justify requests to use the later Code editions and addenda. It also states that The regulations do not specify when the letter must be submitted, only that it be submitted before using the proposed later Code edition and addenda. This is even though 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4)(iv) states it is subject to Commission approval?

A notice of opportunity for public comment was not published in the Federal Register because this RIS was informational and pertained to a staff position that did not represent a departure from current regulatory requirements and practice. Without public comment the Staff missed an opportunity to ensure the requirements ma de sense and were consistent with removing unnecessary burden on the licensees and the NRC.

Page 1 of 2 It is understandable that the staff would want to ensure that all related paragraphs were included if a licensee was adopting portions of later editions and therefore require a submittal.

However, there is no technical justification to support the need for additional Staff approval for the use of a Code edition, in its entirety, that has already been approved in 10 CFR 50.55a.

Currently with 10 CFR 50.55a and RIS 2004-12 a licensee may update their program to the latest Edition of the Code approved in 10 CFR 50.55a, 18 months prior to the start of their new interval. They must also meet all conditions against that edition in 10 CFR 50.55a. However, this RIS restricts a second licensee from using th at same edition, that is approved in 10 CFR 50.55a, seventeen months and 29 days prior to the start of the interval. To use the same Edition, in its entirety, less than 18 months prior to the interval start date they must submit a (f) or (g) (4)(iv) request. There is no technical reason to restrict the use of an entire edition of the Code that has been referenced in 10 CFR 50.55a. This is supported by no technical justification being required. Furthermore, there is no need to ensure all related paragraphs are adopted since the entire edition is included.

Furthermore, this rulemaking approves the use of Code Case N-921, provided that licensees update to the 2019 Edition of Section XI and OMN-31 provided the licensees update to the 2020 Edition of the OM Code. Also, the current editions approved for use in paragraph (a)(1) of 10 CFR 50.55a are the 2019 Edition for ASME Section XI and the 2020 Edition for the OM Code.

Since these two regulations state that the NRC is satisfied with the requirements contained in the 2019 Edition of Section XI and the 2020 Edition of the OM Code provided all conditions in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) are met, it would be prudent to add the following two paragraph changes to this rulemaking to reduce the burden to the licensees and the staff by completing all necessary changes to implement the new requirements.

10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv)

Use of later Code editions and addenda. Inservice tests of pumps and valves may meet the requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (a)(1)(iv) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section.

Portions of editions or addenda may be used, provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda are met and subject to NRC approval.

10 CFR 50.55a (g)(4)(iv)

Applicable ISI Code: Use of subsequent Code editions and addenda. Inservice examination of components and system pressure tests may meet the requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section. Portions of editions or addenda may be used, provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda are met, and subject to Commission approval.

Page 2 of 2 0/ $

April 27, 2023

Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff

Subject:

ASME Comments on NRC Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408 (RG 1.193 Boiler

& Pressure Vessel Code Section III - Code Cases N-907, N-915 & N-916

Dear Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff:

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers on behalf of the Board on Nuclear Codes and standards, appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408 on the proposed changes to Regulatory Guide 1.193. This Regulatory Guide lists ASME Boiler And Pressure Vessel Code, Nuclear Codes Cases that are not approved for use by the USNRC. The ASME BPVC Section III members received and reviewed the NRC disapproval of the subject Code Cases and the basis for those disapprovals. The ASME comments on these disapprovals are attached along with a suggestion that the USNRC should approve Code Case N-907 and a recommended course of action to gain approval on Code Cases N-915 and N-916 by the USNRC.

The ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards appreciates the USNRCs effort in developing these guidance documents and encourage your consideration of these and all stakeholder comments prior to finalizing these draft Regulatory Guides. We trust that you will find these comments useful and informative.

If you have any questions concerning the contents of this letter, please direct them to Ms.

Kathryn Hyam, Director, ASME Nuclear Codes & Standards by telephone (212) 591-8704 or by e-mail hyamk@asme.org.

Very truly yours,

Thomas J. Vogan, Chair ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards

Enclosure:

ASME Section III Responses to DG-1408 cc ASME Board on Nuclear Codes & Standards Ms. Kathryn Hyam, ASME Director of Nuclear Codes and Standards Mr. Robert Keating, Chair BPV III Mr. Timothy Adams, Vice Chair BPV III Mr. Dale Matthews, Vice Chair BPV III Mr. Adam Makowski, Staff Secretary BPV III

0/ $

From: Sigmon, Chet Austin To: RulemakingComments Resource

Subject:

[External_Sender] Duke Energy Comments on NRC-2018-0291 Date: Monday, May 01, 2023 1:23:53 PM Attachments: Federal Register Comments.docx

Good afternoon,

Attached is a compilation of comments from Duke Energy personnel on Federal Register Notice 88 FRN 13717.

Thank you,

Chet A. Sigmon, P.E.

Senior Nuclear Engineer Fleet Licensing Duke Energy Office: (704) 382-7269 Cell: (704) 929-3138 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 43 / Proposed Rule

RG 1.84, Design, Fabrication, and Materials Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III, Revision 40 (Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1405)

RG 1.147, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1, Revision 21 (DG-1406)

Comments provided by Code Case N-921: The proposed condition in conjunction Austin Keller (ISI) with 10CFR50.55a revisions appears to administrative based rather than a safety concern. Provided previous 6-1 editions and addenda were reviewed and approved for use by the NRC, what is the safety basis for updating to the 2019 Edition? Plants who have recently updated ISI programs to editions earlier than the 2019 Edition, would have to before a mid-interval code update or wait until the end of the current interval to adopt this code case.

RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance [OM] Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code, Revision 5 (DG-1407)

Comments provided by Regarding Draft Reg. Guide 1.192, DG-1407, Table 2, Chad Smith (Valves) Conditional acceptability of Code Case OMN-31. Per the NRC's condition, OMN-31 may only be applied by Licensees "implementing" the ASME OM Code, 2020 Edition or later. The word "implementing" is somewhat ambiguous. Example, McGuire is in the process of "implementing" the 2020 edition of the ASME OM Code for their next IST Program Update in 2024 (currently on the 2004 edition). The NRC's condition could be interpreted to mean that McGuire may use OMN-31 because they are "implementing" or "moving to" the 2020 code. However, I 6-2 believe NRC's intent of this condition is that OMN-31 may only be applied by Licensees who have implemented (i.e.

comply with) the 2020 OM Code or later edition.

Recommendation:

For Draft Reg. Guide 1.192, DG-1407, Table 2, Conditional acceptability of Code Case OMN-31, the NRC should clarify whether a licensee who is in the process of "implementing" the 2020 edition of the OM Code may use OMN-31 to extend their current IST Program interval to provide more time for implementing the 2020 edition of the ASME OM Code. Table 2 uses the word "implementing" instead of "implemented". In this case, I believe the NCR wants a Licensee to have fully "implemented" the 2020 Edition of the ASME OM Code in order to utilize OMN-

31. It would be helpful to clarify this in Table 2.

Comments provided by No programmatic impacts noted.

Ronald Saleeby (Pumps)

Comments provided by No programmatic impacts noted.

Tim Canter (Snubbers) 200 Exelon Way Kennett Square, PA 19348 www.ConstellationEnergy.com

0/ $

56

0D\\ 

6HFUHWDU\\

$771 5XOHPDNLQJVDQG$GMXGLFDWLRQV6WDII 8 6 1XFOHDU5HJXODWRU\\&RPPLVVLRQ

DVKLQJWRQ '& +/-

6XEMHFW &RPPHQWV&RQFHUQLQJ3URSRVHG5XOH &)5 $PHULFDQ6RFLHW\\RI

0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHUV &RGH&DVHVDQG8SGDWH)UHTXHQF\\  )5 GDWHG

0DUFK  'RFNHW,'15& 

7KLVOHWWHULVEHLQJVXEPLWWHGLQUHVSRQVHWRWKH8 6 1XFOHDU5HJXODWRU\\&RPPLVVLRQ15&

UHTXHVWIRUFRPPHQWVFRQFHUQLQJ3URSRVHG5XOH &)5 $PHULFDQ6RFLHW\\RI

0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHUV&RGH&DVHVDQG8SGDWH)UHTXHQF\\ SXEOLVKHGLQWKH)HGHUDO5HJLVWHU RQ0DUFK  L H  )5  

7KH15&LVSURSRVLQJWR DPHQGLWVUHJXODWLRQVWRLQFRUSRUDWHE\\ UHIHUHQFHSURSRVHGUHYLVLRQV

RIWKUHH  UHJXODWRU\\JXLGHV ZKLFKZRXOGDSSURYH QHZ UHYLVHG DQGUHDIILUPHGFRGHFDVHV SXEOLVKHGE\\WKH$PHULFDQ6RFLHW\\RI 0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHUV$60( 7KLVSURSRVHGDFWLRQ

ZRXOGDOORZQXFOHDUSRZHUSODQWOLFHQVHHVDQGDSSOLFDQWVIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWV RSHUDWLQJ

OLFHQVHV FRPELQHGOLFHQVHV VWDQGDUGGHVLJQFHUWLILFDWLRQV VWDQGDUGGHVLJQDSSURYDOV DQG

PDQXIDFWXULQJOLFHQVHV WRXVHWKHFRGHFDVHVOLVWHGLQWKHVHGUDIWUHJXODWRU\\JXLGHVDV

YROXQWDU\\DOWHUQDWLYHVWRHQJLQHHULQJVWDQGDUGVIRU WKHFRQVWUXFWLRQ LQVHUYLFHLQVSHFWLRQ DQG

LQVHUYLFHWHVWLQJRIQXFOHDUSRZHUSODQWFRPSRQHQWV

&RQVWHOODWLRQ(QHUJ\\*HQHUDWLRQ //&&(*DSSUHFLDWHVWKHRSSRUWXQLW\\WRFRPPHQWDQG

RIIHUVWKHDWWDFKHGFRPPHQWVRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSRVHGUXOHIRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQE\\WKH15& 

&(*DOVRHQGRUVHVWKHFRPPHQWVVXEPLWWHGE\\WKH1XFOHDU(QHUJ\\,QVWLWXWH1(,RQEHKDOI

RIWKH LQGXVWU\\FRQFHUQLQJWKLVSURSRVHGUXOH

,I\\RXKDYHDQ\\TXHVWLRQVRUUHTXLUHDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQ SOHDVHFRQWDFW5LFKDUG*URSSDW

5LFKDUG *URSS#FRQVWHOODWLRQ FRP 

5HVSHFWIXOO\\

'DYLG3 +HONHU 6U 0DQDJHU /LFHQVLQJ

&RQVWHOODWLRQ(QHUJ\\*HQHUDWLRQ //&

$WWDFKPHQW

6/12/23, 9:43 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/00c7531b-f581-4105-9fb8-9f10c8b495d8

As of: 6/12/23, 9:43 AM Received: June 08, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lin-9nqy-asz6 Comments Due: June 16, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency (Rev. 40)

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0018 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency; Extension of Comment Period

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0019 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-09218

Submitter Information

Name: mcqquestions.net mcqquestions.net Address:

FL,

General Comment

The website mcqquestions.net offers a comprehensive collection of <a 8-1 href="https://mcqquestions.net/mechanical-engineering"> Mechanical Engineering MCQs </a>. It covers various topics in the field, providing an excellent resource for students and professionals alike. With its wide range of questions, it enables individuals to test their knowledge and enhance their understanding of key concepts in Mechanical Engineering.

Attachments

best site for SSC preparation

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/00c7531b-f581-4105-9fb8-9f10c8b495d8 1/1

RulemakingComments Resource

From: Kathryn Hyam <HyamK@asme.org>

Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:37 AM To: RulemakingComments Resource Cc: Adam Maslowski; Tom Vogan; PRESSBURGER, MAURY A; Ronald Lippy; Rick Swayne; Daniel Miro-Quesada; Kathryn Hyam; Oliver Martinez; Mark Ferlisi; Michael Benson; David Rudland; c.n.pendleton@sbcglobal.net; Gowin, Mark Allen; Cardillo, Augi; Dan Lamond (dlamond@tnorthconsulting.com); Tom Roberts (tom@pomo18.com)

Subject:

[External_Sender] ASME BNCS Comments on Docket ID NRC-2018-0291 Attachments: ASME Letter Providing Comments on 50.55a RG 1.147 Rule.pdf

Towhomitmayconcern:

ASMEispleasedtohavetheopportunitytoprovideaddi onalcommentsandsugges onsonDraRegulatoryGuides

DG1406andDG1408,andtheProposedRuleIncorpora ngtheFinalRevisionofRegulatoryGuide1.147into10CFR

50.55a,DocketIDNRC-2018-0291.

Please ndthecompiledcommentsfromASMEBoardonNuclearCodesandStandardsa ached,forconsidera on

duringthisrulemaking.

Sincerely,

KateHyam,PE,PMP

Director

NuclearCodesandStandards

ASME

1828LSt.N.W.,

Washington,DC200365104

Tel1.212.591.8704

hyamk@asme.org

1 June 15, 2023

Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff

Subject:

ASME BNCS Comments on Draft Regulatory Guides DG-1406 and DG-1408, and the Proposed Rule Incorporating the Final Revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147 into 10 CFR 50.55a, Docket ID NRC-2018-0291

References:

1. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406, (Proposed Revision 21 of Regulatory Guide 1.147, dated January 2023), Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1 (ADAMS Accession No. ML22195A284)

2. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408, (Proposed Revision 8 of Regulatory Guide 1.193, dated January 2023), ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use (ADAMS Accession No. ML22196A065)

3. Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 43, pp. 13717-13735, Monday, March 6, 2023, 10 CFR 50, [NRC-2018-0291],

RIN 3150-AK23, Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency

4. Letter from Thomas Vogan (ASME) to Ms. Louise Lund (NRC),

Requesting Specific Code Cases to be Included in Draft Revision 21 of Regulatory Guide 1.147, dated December 22, 2021 ADAMS Accession No. ML22046A112)

Dear Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff:

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers on behalf of the Board on Nuclear Codes and standards, appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on draft Regulatory Guides DG-1406 and DG-1408, and the proposed rule to incorporate by reference Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21 into 10 CFR 50.55a. Comments on the proposed Code of Record update requirements.

The ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards appreciates the USNRCs endorsement of its Nuclear Code Cases and the USNRCs continued effort to complete these updates and rulemakings on a regular basis. To facilitate the USNRC endorsement of Code Cases in Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21, comments in Enclosure 1 are provided for consideration June 15, 2023 Page 2 of 2

by the USNRC. Enclosure 2 provides comments on DG-1408 (draft revision 8 of Regulatory Guide 1.193).

Also included are comments on draft 10 CFR 50.55a rule to establish Code of Record update requirements are provided in Enclosure 3.

If you have any questions concerning the contents of this letter, please direct them to Ms.

Kathryn Hyam, ASME Director, Nuclear Codes and Standards by telephone at (212) 591-8704 or by e-mail (hyamk@asme.org) and thank you for consideration of our comments.

Very Truly Yours,

Thomas J. Vogan, Chair ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards tomvogan45@gmail.com

Enclosures:

1. Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406

2. Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408

3. Comments on 10 CFR 50.55a Code of Record Update Requirements

cc: Michael Benson, USNRC (michael.benson@nrc.gov)

David Rudland, USNRC (david.rudland@nrc.gov)

ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards Officers of the ASME Standards Committee on Nuclear Inservice Inspection Officers of the ASME Standards Committee on Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants Daniel Miro Quesada, Staff Secretary BPVC Section XI Oliver Martinez, Staff Secretary OM Enclosure 1 Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1

1. Comments on the request to specifically include selected Code Cases in Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21 We appreciate the action taken by the USNRC to propose the addition of Code Cases N-663-1, N-885-1, and N-921 to Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21. We had specifically requested that these Cases be included in Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21 by letter dated December 22, 2021 (Reference 4).

There are no comments concerning the addition of any of the Code Cases proposed for addition to Table 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.147.

2. Comments on ASME Code Case N-752-1, Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment for Repair/Replacement Activities in Class 2 and 3 Systems,Section XI, Division 1 9-1 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406 does not include ASME Code Case N-752-1, which was published in Supplement 0 of the 2021 Edition. This Case should have been included in DG-1406 for the following reasons:

2.1. The ASME BPVC Section XI Standards Committee supported and approved the methodologies in Cases N-752 and N-752-1, as noted below.

x BPVC Section XI Standards Committee voted to approve Case N-752 in ASME Ballot 18-3566RC1, which closed on March 27, 2019.

x BPVC Section XI Standards Committee voted to approve Case N-752-1 with no further comments in ASME Ballot 20-3750RC1, which closed on January 6, 2021.

2.2. The USNRC staff also approved the industry lead plant application of Case N-752 for Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 via relief request on May 19, 2021 (ML21118B039). The USNRC technical evaluation of this request concluded, in part, that The specified exemptions in Code Case N-752 are consistent with scope of the requirements for RISC-3 and RISC-4 SSCs listed in 10 CFR 50.69(b)(1) that licensees can voluntarily exempt after implementation of 10 CFR 50.69, and that The USNRC staff finds that the licensees adherence to the above elements covered in Code Case N-752 for repair/replacement activities provides reasonable confidence that each LSS item will remain capable of performing its safety-related function.

2.3. Additionally, the risk-informed categorization methodology in N-752-1 is the same as that used by plants that have approved License Amendment Requests (LARs) to implement USNRC regulation 10CFR50.69 (Risk-informed categorization and treatment of structures, systems and components for nuclear power reactors). To date, there are approximately 50 plants (units) that have obtained USNRC approval to use this risk-informed categorization methodology.

We respectfully request that USNRC complete t he review of ASME BPVC Section XI Code Case N-752-1 and include this Case in Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21. If Code Case N-752-1 is not approved for use in Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21, we respectfully request that USNRC identify the technical and sa fety concerns supporting USNRCs reason for not approving this Case in this regulatory guide. We request that this information be provided in writing at the earliest opportunity to allow the BPVC Section XI Committee to propose and approve any changes needed to address the USNRCs concerns with the

Page 1 of 2 Enclosure 1 Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1406, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1

acceptability of this Case.

3. Comments on proposed changes to Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21, Table 2.

3.1. Comments on ASME Code Case N-880-1, Alternative to Procurement 9-2 Requirements of IWA-4143 for Nonstandard Welded Fittings,Section XI, Division 1

The USNRC has proposed a new condition that would limit the use of this Case to NPS 2 (DN 50) or smaller fittings.

The USNRCs analysis of the basis for the original Case N-880 is incorrect. When the USNRC approved the original Case N-880, the Case already permitted these fittings on piping larger than RCS makeup capacity. The technical basis for the original Case N-880 stated, It permits extension of the IWA-4131 provisions from NPS 1 (DN25) or RCS makeup capacity to NPS 2 (DN50). This NPS 2 limit was indeed arbitrary.

Contrary to the proposed new condition, it clearly had nothing to do with RCS makeup capacity. And this basis was accepted by the USNRC in the current R.G. 1.147.

Therefore, the USNRCs proposed condition new condition is arbitrary and without any technical basis. In a request for alternativ e from a utility, the USNRC was presented a large amount of evidence of testing of such fittings, including sizes larger than NPS 2.

These fittings have also been used in many industrial applications in sizes larger than NPS 2, for many years. Therefore, the USNRC should not add any new, arbitrary, conditions on Case N-880-1 that are different from those currently imposed on use of Case N-880.

We recommend that the USNRC delete the prop osed condition from Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21.

3.2. N-921, Alternative 12-yr Inspection Interval Duration,Section XI, Division 1

9-3 The USNRC has proposed the following condition on the use of Code Case N-921:

The licensees code of record for the inservice inspection program must be the 2019 Edition of Section XI or later, in order to apply this code case.

In the draft § 50.55a rule, the USNRC indicates that this condition is being imposed to ensure that the desired order and predictability in licensee inservice inspection programs is maintained. This position does not provide a safety basis for imposing this condition.

We recommend that the USNRC delete the proposed condition from Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 21.

Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 2 Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408, ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use

1. Comments on ASME Code Case N-897, Analytical Evaluation Procedures for Axial Flaws in Partial-Penetration Nozzle Welds,Section XI, Division 1 9-4 The USNRC has proposed the addition of Code Case N-897 to Table 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.193, with the following justification:

Code Case N-897 applies to non-Code repair techniques that have been implemented in the U.S. via relief requests per NRC regulations. The NRC's relief request process allows the staff to review and approve appropriate NDE procedures that otherwise have not been established for these repairs as part of N-897. Application of N-897 allows the Owner to determine that a repaired flaw is acceptable, avoiding the need to submit a relief request to the NRC. In that case, the staff could not review and approve the NDE procedures applied to the repair.

Comments:

The purpose of this Code Case N-897 is to provide guidance and a general procedure when performing an analytical evaluation for an axial flaw in a J-groove partial penetration weld. The Case provides analytical evaluation procedures for an axial indication detected by a nondestructive examination or by evidence of leakage in a partial-penetration nozzle attachment J-groove weld during an inspection. The analytical evaluation may also be applied for a postulated flaw condition where a flaw is postulated to remain in a J-groove weld following a nozzle repair activity.

The scope only covers the analytical procedure and acceptance criteria consistent with the existing requirements in ASME BPVC Section XI. The Case describes the details for stress analysis modeling, flaw characterization, flaw growth analysis, and flaw stability analysis to demonstrate structural stability for the evaluation period of operation consistent with other code sections (e.g., IWB-3600: Nonmandatory Appendix A, Nonmandatory Appendix C, and Nonmandatory Appendix O). Although the Case may be used to support the justification of continued operation of a weld that has been repaired, it doesnt provide any requirements for conducting an actual weld repair, including the type of weld design, welding methods, materials, inspection frequency, NDE methods, etc. The repair geometries shown in N-897 are only illustrative examples of where the analytical procedure may apply. Th is Case does not provide acceptance of any repair plan or method, but provides information needed to perform an evaluation of a detected or postulated flaw. For repair/replacement activities that are not compliant with IWA-4000 or a Code Case approved for use in Regulatory Guide 1.147, an Owner would be required to submit a relief request in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(z). If an Owner deviates from any of the specific requirements of Code Case N-897, an Owner would also be required to submit a relief request in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(z).

As additional background, N-897 was developed jointly by the ASME and JSME organizations and reflects an international cooperative effort that would benefit both code bodies. USNRC approval of this Case may also make also allow the Japanese regulatory authorities to approve the use of this Case in Japan.

We respectfully request that USNRC identify changes that could be made to N-897 to address the concerns identified in DG-1408. Alternatively, we recommend that the

Page 1 of 2 Enclosure 2 Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1408, ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use

USNRC consider adding this Case to Regulatory Guide 1.147, Table 2 with appropriate conditions, if necessary, to address the USNRC concerns.

Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 3 Comments on 10 CFR 50.55a Code of Record Update Requirements

1. Comments on proposed changes to § 50.55a(b)(5)(ii) and (iii), and § 50.55a(b)(6)(ii) and (iii) 9-5 We support the proposed changes to these § 50.55a paragraphs. Licensees should be permitted to continue using superseded and annulled ASME BPVC Section XI and OM Code Cases that have been listed in their programs (prior to their being superseded or annulled) if they are applicable to their current code of record. If the USNRC has determined that use of a specific ASME BPVC Section XI or OM Code edition is acceptable for a Code of Record Interval as long as 25 years, then Code Cases applicable to that edition should also be permissible to be used for that Code of Record Interval.

2. Comments on proposed changes to 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(1) and (y)(2)

We support the clarification provided by defining the terms Code of record and Code of 9-6 record interval. The proposed definitions in 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(1) and (y)(2) are necessary for licensees wishing to use a specific code of record for more than a single inservice inspection or inservice examination and test interval. However, we suggest that the USNRC consider the following comments pertaining to these new provisions:

2.1. The provisions in 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(2)(ii) should not be limited to the specified ASME BPVC Section XI editions. Instead, Owners sh ould be permitted to use any editions that are incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(a) for their code of record interval, provided all applicable conditions specified in § 50.55a(b)(2) are met. The draft rule did 9-7 not provide any safety reason to justify limiting the extended code of record interval to the ASME BPVC Section XI, 2019 Edition, or later editions incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of § 50.55a.

We recommend that the USNRC revise 10 CFR 50.55a(y) to allow licensees to use any editions of Section XI that are incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(a) for their code of record interval, provided all applicable conditions specified in

§ 50.55a(b)(2) are met.

9-8 2.2. The language proposed in 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(2)(ii) would require a licensee to use the same code of record for two consecutive inspection or examination and test intervals.

when using the ASME BPVC Section XI, 2019 Edition and OM Code, 2020 Edition, or later editions incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of § 50.55a. A licensee should be permitted to continue updating their code of record for their inspection or examination and test intervals every inspecti on interval, if desired, without having to submit a request to the USNRC in accordance with § 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and § 50.55a(g)(4)(iv) to do so. The proposed change in § 50.55a(y)(2)(ii) would impose an unnecessary administrative burden on licensees that may wish to update their inspection program to a later edition of the BPVC Section XI or OM Code every inspection interval.

We recommend that the USNRC revise 10 CFR 50.55a(y) to allow the use of a code of record for one inservice inspection (ISI) or examination and test (IST) interval, or two consecutive ISI or IST intervals.

9-9 We also recommend that the USNRC revise 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4)(iv) to allow licensees to meet the requirements in later Code editions that

Page 1 of 2 Enclosure 3 Comments on 10 CFR 50.55a Code of Record Update Requirements

9-9 are incorporated by reference in § 50.55a(a) at any time during the Code of Record Interval without having to obtain USNRC approval, provided the later Code edition is used in its entirety, and the applicable conditions in § 50.55a(b) and (c) are met.

Requiring licensees to seek regulatory approval to use an entire later Code edition that has been accepted by the USNRC imposes an unnecessary administrative burden on licensees.

3. Comments on proposed changes to 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(3) and (y)(6) 9-10 We believe that the addition of definitions for inservice examination and test (IST) interval and inspection interval, are appropriate to delineate between the intervals described in the ASME BPVC Section XI and OM Code and the code of record interval described in § 50.55a(y)(2).

We recommend that the title of § 50.55a(y)(6) be revised to read (6) Inservice inspection (ISI) interval to be consistent with the format and title of § 50.55a(y)(3).

4. Comments on proposed changes to 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(4) and (y)(5) 9-11 We believe that the proposed definitions for inservice inspection (ISI) program, and inservice examination and testing (IST) program are unnecessary. The industry has not struggled with defining these programs, which have been required by § 50.55a for many years. Further clarification does not seem warranted.

We recommend that the USNRC remove the propos ed content of 10 CFR 50.55a(y)(4) and (y)(5) from the final rule.

5. Additional comments pertaining to the use of alternatives approved in accordance 9-12 with 10 CFR 50.55a(z)

The proposed rule does not provide guidance on whether licensees may use alternatives approved in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(z) during the code of record interval, or whether use of alternatives may be authorized only for a single inspection interval.

We recommend that the USNRC revise the final rule to clarify that alternatives approved in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(z) may be used for the duration of the code of record interval.

Page 2 of 2 6/20/23, 11:24 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/29695610-a5ce-4b32-ba8d-514540d150ff

As of: 6/20/23, 11:24 AM Received: June 16, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. liz-0dh2-58l0 Comments Due: June 16, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency (Rev. 40)

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0018 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency; Extension of Comment Period

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0023 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-09218

Submitter Information

Email: acchambe@southernco.com Organization: Southern Nuclear

General Comment

Please see attached

Attachments

NL-23-0494

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/29695610-a5ce-4b32-ba8d-514540d150ff 1/1 Regulatory Affairs 3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, AL 35243

205 992 5000

June 16, 2023

NL-23-0494 Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Washington, D. C. 20555-0001

Southern Nuclear Operating Company Comments Concerning Proposed 10 CFR 50.55a Rule Change and Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1406, Proposed Revision 21 to RG 1.147

Ladies and Gentlemen:

On March 6, 2023 the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published Federal Register Notice (FRN) 88 FR 13717 issuing a proposed 10 CFR 50.55a rule change and draft regulatory guides, including DG-1406, ASME Section XI Division 1 Code Case Acceptability, for public comment. Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) offers the comments within the Enclosure for consideration by the NRC regarding DG-1406 and FRN 88 FR 13717.

This letter contains no NRC commitments. If you have any questions, please contact Amy Chamberlain at 205.992.6351.

Respectfully submitted,

Amy C. Chamberlain AmyCChamberlain Nuclear Licensing Manager

ACC/dsp/cbg

Enclosure:

Comments Concerning 10 CFR 50.55a Proposed Rule

cc: Southern Nuclear Operating Company SNC Document Services - RType: CGA02.001

6/20/23, 11:11 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/d3186158-435c-41be-8520-7ba2e4207ff0

As of: 6/20/23, 11:11 AM Received: June 15, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lix-muzt-w45t Comments Due: June 16, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency (Rev. 40)

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0018 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency; Extension of Comment Period

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0021 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-09218

Submitter Information

Email: atb@nei.org Organization: Nuclear Energy Institute

General Comment

See attached file(s)

Attachments

06-15-23_NRC_Industry Comments on Draft RGs 1_147 1_84 and 1_192

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/d3186158-435c-41be-8520-7ba2e4207ff0 1/1 THOMAS BASSO Senior Director, Engineering and Risk

1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 200 P: 202.739.8049 tbb@nei.org nei.org

June 15, 2023

Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff

Project Number: 689

Subject:

NEI Comments on Proposed 10 CFR 50.55a Rule Change and Draft Regulatory Guides

1. DG-1406, Proposed Revision 21 to RG 1.147, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1;

2. DG-1407, Proposed Revision 5 to RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code; and

3. DG-1408, Proposed Revision 8 to RG 1.193, ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use; FRN 2023-03742; Docket ID NRC-2018-0291.

Submitted via regulations.gov

Dear Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 1, on behalf of our members, appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed 10 CFR 50.55a Rule Change, and Draft Regulatory Guides DG-1406, DG-1407 and DG-1408 on the subject proposed revisions to Regulatory Guides 1.147, 1.192 and 1.193. The first two regulatory guides list the code cases for ASME Section XI-Division 1, and the OM Code, that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved for use as voluntary alternatives to the mandatory referenced Code provisions that are incorporated by reference into Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities. The third regulatory guide lists those ASME code cases the NRC does not approve for use. We appreciate and are in support of the revision to extend the current NRC requirement for nuclear power plant licensees to update the codes of record for their inservice testing (IST) and inservice inspection (ISI) programs from every 10 years to after two consecutive intervals. We appreciate the NRC staff maintaining the routine approval of ASME Code Cases

1 The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of ge neric operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff June 15, 2023 Page 2

which provides the industry the opportunity to implement the improvements and efficiencies developed by the various code committees through the standards development organization consensus process.

NEI is also providing responses to the NRCs questions about the inclusion of definitions in the rule, along with some comments on the proposed rulemaking in general. We also include several comments on the limitations in the rulemaking and the conditions to the associated Code Cases for extending the ISI and IST program updates to two consecutive intervals. Requiring licensees to be on the 2019 Edition of ASME XI and 2020 Edition of the OM Code to extend their updates to two consecutive intervals will require many licensees to make an additional update to both ISI and IST programs for no safety benefits.

Comments on the rulemaking and each draft regulatory guide as well as responses to the questions posed by the NRC are provided in four separate attachments. The attachments also include recommendations for the agencys consideration in finalizing the rulemaking and regulatory guides.

We appreciate the NRCs effort in developing these guidance documents and encourage your consideration of all stakeholder comments prior to finalizing these draft Regulatory Guides. Please contact me at tbb@nei.org or (484) 366-7534 with any questions or comments about the content of this letter or the attached comments.

Sincerely,

Thomas Basso

Attachments

c: Andrea Veil, NRR/NRC Robert Taylor, NRR/NRC Andrea Kock, NRR/NRC

THOMAS BASSO Senior Director, Engineering and Risk

1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 200 P: 202.739.8049 tbb@nei.org nei.org

June 23, 2023

Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff

Project Number: 689

Subject:

Supplement to NEI Comments on Proposed 10 CFR 50.55a Rule Change and Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1407, Proposed Revision 5 to RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code, Docket ID NRC-2018-0291.

Dear Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 1, on behalf of our members, submitted comments on the proposed 10 CFR 50.55a Rule Change, and Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1407 on proposed revisions to Regulatory Guide 1.192 on June 15, 2023. Comments were made on the change to both Sections 50.55a(y)(2)(i) and the proposed Reg Guide 1.192 condition on OM Code Case OMN-31 that require licensees to be adopt OM Code 2020 Edition. As noted in our June 15 comments, NEI was in the process of working with ASME OM to provide a detailed comparison of the ASME OM 2017 and 2020 Editions at the time our comment letter was submitted.

NEI received permission from ASME OM to use the ASME OM 2020 Summary of Changes to compare the changes from OM 2017 Edition to the 2020 Edition. At tachment 1 documents the evaluation of each change from OM 2017 to OM 2020 and shows the changes are mainly administrative, clarifications, editorial, and corrections. The few technical changes are not substa ntive and did not remove any requirements for testing or examinations. Therefore, the changes will have no impact on safety. We respectfully request that the NRC consider the attached change evaluation as a supplement to our June 15 comments. We believe the 12-1 evaluation demonstrates that there is no safety basis for the condition included in the proposed rule that requires licensees to implement the ASME OM 2020 Edition to use OM Code Case OMN-31. Making this revision would extend the application of the proposed rule change and the code case to more licensees,

1 The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of generic operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff June 23, 2023 Page 2

without the significant and unnecessary burden of havi ng to update their Inservice Testing Program to the 12-1 OM 2020 Edition.

NEI requests the NRC consider this supplemental information as part of the comments submitted in our letter dated June 15, 2023. Please contact me at tbb@nei.org or (484) 366-7534 with any questions or comments about the content of th is letter or the attachment.

Sincerely,

Thomas Basso

Attachment

c: Andrea Veil, NRR/NRC Robert Taylor, NRR/NRC Andrea Kock, NRR/NRC NRC Document Control Desk

Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

Attachment 1: Industry Review of Summary of Changes to OM 2017 Edition Incorporated for the OM 2020 Edition

Following approval by the ASME OM Committee and ASME, and after public review, ASME OM-2020 was approved by the American National Standards Institute on May 11, 2020.

ASME OM-2020 includes the following changes identified by a margin note, (20).

Page Location Change Type of Change 1 ISTA-1400 (1) Revised Administrative: Adds responsibility to the Owner to ensure specific revisions of standards and specifications are acceptable for use.

(2) Table ISTA-1400-1 deleted Administrative: Table with specific year /

revision of referenced standards and specifications was deleted based on chance in ISTA-1400 4 ISTA-3200 (1) Former subpara. (a) deleted, and Administrative: Removed requirement to file remaining subparagraphs redesignated IST Plan with regulatory authority. This requirement has been relocated to NRCs jurisdiction in 10 CFR 50.55a for the USA.

(2) Subparagraph (e) added Administrative: New subparagraph which replaces previous (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) to relocate requirements for determining the code of record for preservice and inservice intervals from OM to the regulatory authority.

5 ISTA-5000 Revised Administrative: New Section and language which simply points to applicable subsections of OM for the specific test requirements 5 ISTA-6000 Revised Administrative: New and language which simply points to applicable subsections of OM for the monitoring, analysis, and evaluation requirements 6 ISTB-1400 Subparagraph (d) revised Administrative: Revised language to remove refence to Appendix V which was incorporated into ISTB 6 ISTB-2000 Definitions of baseline test and pump Clarification: New definition for baseline periodic verification test test to replace the term preservice test to added clarify the test is required regardless of whether it is during the preservice period or inservice period. The test requirements (when and how) have not changed - just the name in order to eliminate confusion.

Administrative: Definition for periodic verification test was relocated from Appendix V to ISTB-2000 as part of integration of Appendix V into ISTB.

6 ISTB-3100 (1) First paragraph and subpara. (c) revised Clarification: Language was changed as part of the change from preservice test to baseline test to clarify that the baseline test is requirements are applicable in both preservice and inservice periods.

xxiv Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

(2) Subparagraph (d) deleted Administrative: Deleted unnecessary subparagraph. ISTB-3100(d) is duplicate of ISTB-3100(c) since both pump types are positive displacement pumps and reference the same section, ISTB-5310 7 Table ISTB-3000-1 Second column head and Note (1) revised Administrative: Part of the larger change of preservice test to baseline test 7 ISTB-3310 Revised in its entirety Clarification and Administrative: ISTB-3310 was restructured to split requirement into two new subparagraphs ISTB-3311 and ISTB-331. These new subparagraphs clarify when a baseline test (previously designated as a preservice test) is required. The new language reflects the original intent of when a preservice test was required and is consistent with how the industry has implemented the previous editions of OM with respect to preservice testing. This clarification is part of the larger change of preservice test to baseline test 8 Table ISTB-3400-1 Note (1) revised Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 8 ISTB-3400 Revised Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 9 Table ISTB-3510-1 (1) Third column head revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test (2) Fourth column added Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 9 ISTB-5000 Revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 10 ISTB-5110 Title and subpara. (a) revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 10 ISTB-5122 First paragraph and subparas. (c) and (d) Correction: Corrected language from an revised earlier code change which allowed variance from the fixed reference value. The variance language was inadvertently included in the section for Group B pump tests although it should not have been applicable since only one hydraulic parameter is required to be measured.

11 ISTB-5124 Added Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 12 ISTB-5210 Title and subpara. (a) revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test, and Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V

xxiv Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

12 ISTB-5222 First paragraph and subparas. (c) and (d) Correction: Corrected language from an revised earlier code change which allowed variance from the fixed reference value. The variance language was inadvertently included in the section for Group B pump tests although it should not have been applicable since only one hydraulic parameter is required to be measured.

13 ISTB-5224 Added Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 13 ISTB-5310 Title revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 14 ISTB-5322 First paragraph and subparas. (c) and (d) Correction: Corrected language from an revised earlier code change which allowed variance from the fixed reference value. The variance language was inadvertently included in the section for Group B pump tests although it should not have been applicable since only one hydraulic parameter is required to be measured.

16 ISTB-5324 Added Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 16 ISTB-6000 First paragraph added Clarification: Added language to better differentiate when systematic error (ISTB-6300) can be used versus corrective action (ISTB-6200) 16 ISTB-6200 Subparagraph (b) revised Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 16 ISTB-9100 Subparagraph (e) added Administrative: Part of the change which integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V 18 ISTC-1200 Subparagraph (d) revised Administrative: Removed reference to Category A and Category B as it was determined to be unnecessary to distinguish different possible categories of safety and relief valves 19 ISTC-3000 ISTC-3800 deleted Administrative: ISTC-3800 was renumbered to ISTC-4000. The actual text of the paragraph did not change. Title of ISTC-4000 was revised accordingly 20 Table ISTC-3500-1 (1) Third entry in first column and fifth entry Clarification: Added Note 4 to provide a in last column revised pointer to Mandatory Appendix I for PORVs (2) Note (4) added, and subsequent Notes Clarification: Added Note 4 to provide a redesignated pointer to Mandatory Appendix I for PORVs.

The language of the referenced Appendix I paragraphs did not change.

22 ISTC-4000 Revised Administrative: ISTC-3800 was renumbered to ISTC-4000. The actual text of the paragraph did not change. Title of ISTC-4000 was revised accordingly 23 ISTC-5112 Revised Clarification: Added reference to specific paragraphs of Mandatory Appendix I

xxiv Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

28 Subsection ISTD Title revised Administrative: Title change only. Changed words Examination and Testing of to Requirements for 28 ISTD-1110 Revised Clarification: Added language to refer to ISTD-1800 28 ISTD-1400 (1) First paragraph and subpara. (b) Clarification: Revised language to clarify revised emphasize the requirements of Subsection ISTA must be met. Technically, this is redundant since you cant get to Subsection ISTD without going through ISTA.

(2) Subparagraph (d) added Administrative: Change to be consistent with the title change of Subsection ISTD 28 ISTD-1600 Revised Clarification: Added repair and to better reflect the title of ISTD-1600, Snubber Modification and Replacement 29 ISTD-1800 Revised Clarification: Language changed to better clarify when the evaluation requirements of ISTD-1800 apply. The evaluation requirement itself is unchanged.

29 ISTD-2000 (1) Definition of service life revised Clarification: Changed an item to a snubber and added clarification at its installed location.

(2) Definition of service life monitoring Clarification: New definition to better added describe the overall intent of service life monitoring required by ISTD-6200. Note that the requirements of ISTD-6200 have not changed.

30 ISTD-3240 Revised Clarification: Added language to clarify intent which includes newly identified design difference.

30 ISTD-4110 Revised Clarification: Minor change in language to replace the term supported system with affected systems, structures, or components to reduce confusing terms 33 ISTD-5240 Revised Technical: Relaxed timeframe for start of pre-outage activities from 60 days to 92 days.

While this is technically a relaxation in requirements, it is intended to provide flexibility for implementation of ISTD requirements. It doesnt change the actual testing or examination requirements.

35 ISTD-5331 Revised Editorial: Revised formula by replacing mathematical expressions with defined terms, then defining those terms using the previous mathematical expressions. Overall, there was no change to the math or results - the only thing that change is how it is written.

37 ISTD-6000 (1) Title revised Administrative: Revised title to better represent the subordinate requirements (2) ISTD-6100 and ISTD-6200 revised in Clarification: Revised language to better their entirety reflect original intent. While the language was changed considerably, the revised language doesnt add or remove requirements that werent originally intended to be performed 38 ISTD-9500 Added Technical: Added new requirement for maintaining service life records. While this changed is identified as Technical it only adds administrative requirements for record keeping. It doesnt change actual test or examination requirements.

xxiv Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

42 ISTE-4160 Revised Technical: Add a new requirement to provide a basis if the PRA model is not updated to address added risk from a failure of a component that is not modeled. This is a documentation requirement which does not affect testing or examination requirements.

Therefore, it is inconsequential from a safety benefit perspective.

44 ISTE-5121 Subparagraphs (b) and (c) revised Correction: Changed wording for the comprehensive test to reflect the change in flow rate which was first made to ISTB in the 2017 Edition, but the change in flow rate terms was inadvertently missed for ISTE in the 2017 Edition. This change corrects that error.

44 ISTE-5122 Subparagraph (b) revised Correction: Changed wording for the comprehensive test to reflect the change in flow rate which was first made to ISTB in the 2017 Edition, but the change in flow rate terms was inadvertently missed for ISTE in the 2017 Edition. This change corrects that error.

45 ISTE-5220 Revised Administrative: Simplified language to refer to ISTC for check valve testing rather than specific sections or Appendix II. The general reference to ISTC is more correct and covers all scenarios for check valve testing.

46 ISTE-6110 Revised Clarification: Added the word testable to clarify those attributes which are selected for monitoring. This change clarifies the original intent.

47 ISTF-2000 Definition of baseline test added Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 47 ISTF-3100 (1) First paragraph revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test (2) Subparagraph (d) deleted Administrative: Eliminated differentiation between positive displacement pumps and reciprocation pumps since both are positive displacement pumps. The deleted paragraph referenced the same paragraph that is also referenced in the remaining requirement for positive displacement pumps.

48 Table ISTF-3000-1 Second column head revised Editorial: No discernable change other than format.

48 ISTF-3310 Revised in its entirety Clarification and Administrative: ISTF-3310 was restructured to split requirement into two new subparagraphs ISTF-3311 and ISTF-331. These new subparagraphs clarify when a baseline test (previously designated as a preservice test) is required. The new language reflects the original intent of when a preservice test was required and is consistent with how the industry has implemented the previous editions of OM with respect to preservice testing. This clarification is part of the larger change of preservice test to baseline test 49 Table ISTF-3510-1 Second column head revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 50 ISTF-5000 Revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 50 ISTF-5110 Title revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test

xxiv Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

51 ISTF-5210 Title revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 52 ISTF-5310 Title revised Administrative: Part of the larger change from preservice test to baseline test 52 ISTF-6000 First paragraph added Clarification: Added language to better differentiate when systematic error (ISTF-6300) can be used versus corrective action (ISTF-6200) 55 I-1200 First paragraph revised Correction: Corrected reference to ASME PTC 25 by elimination mention of Mandatory Appendix I.

56 I-1320 Subparagraphs (a) and (c)(3) revised Administrative: Change related to integration of Code Case OMN-25 into Mandatory Appendix I 56 I-1350 Subparagraph (a)(3) revised Administrative: Change related to integration of Code Case OMN-25 into Mandatory Appendix I 58 I-3220 Revised Technical: Removed the requirement to determine set-pressure when installed in the system and raising system pressure up to the setpoint. The requirement was simplified to just require set pressure testing within 6 months. This change was made to address difficulties in performing set pressure testing using the installed system pressure which have been subject of previous requests for alternatives. Although this is a technical change with respect to the use of the installed system, it does not change the requirement to perform set pressure testing.

65 II-4000 Subparagraph (b)(5) revised Editorial: Revision to incorporate Errata from 2017 Edition (reference OM Record 16-424) 68 III-3500 Subparagraph (a) revised Clarification: Added language to clarify the original intent that each valve in the group is required to be tested.

78 Division 1, Mandatory Deleted Administrative: Part of the change which Appendix V integrated the requirements from Mandatory Appendix V from the 2017 Edition into Subsection ISTB and deleted Appendix V

Reprinted from ASME OM-2020, by permission of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. All rights reserved.

xxiv 8/23/23, 8:34 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/e8298473-6f9f-48c6-8de7-d61d6c25f386

As of: 8/23/23, 8:33 AM Received: June 14, 2023 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. liv-qjhc-elre Comments Due: June 16, 2023 Submission Type: We b

Docket: NRC-2018-0291 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency (Rev. 40)

Comment On: NRC-2018-0291-0018 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases and Update Frequency; Extension of Comment Period

Document: NRC-2018-0291-DRAFT-0020 Comment on FR Doc # 2023-09218

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

See attached file(s)

Attachments

Comments on ASME Code Update Proposed Rule

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/e8298473-6f9f-48c6-8de7-d61d6c25f386 1/1 Comments on Proposed Rule: ASME Code Cases and Update Frequenc y

[NRC-2018-0291]

The proposed rule would use the 2019 edition of Section XI and the 2020 edition of the OM Code as a threshold for determining the applicable requirements in 10 CFR 50.55a. For example, the proposed definition of the code of record interval changes when a licensee adopts the 2019 edition or later of Section XI. In the preamble for the proposed rule, the NRC states:

The inservice inspection interval and the code of record update interval should be synchronized to promote order and predictability in licens ee inservice inspection programs. The NRC indicates that the proposed conditions on Code Case N-921 and OMN-31 would achieve this result. However, there are a number of issues with the proposed new definitions in 50.55a(y) and conditions on Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31.

Rather than using the 2019 edition of Section XI and the 2020 edition of the OM Code as a 13-1 threshold in the proposed code case condition s and new definitions in 50.55a(y), the NRC should use the effective date of the final rule. Spec ifically, the longer code of record intervals should be applicable starting at the next code of record update following the effective date of the proposed rule. The current ISI, IST, and code of record intervals in progress at the time the rule is made effective should remain at 10-years. If the NRC wants to ensure that the 2019 edition of Section XI and 2020 edition of the OM Code are implemented, the effective date could be made to coincide with the date 18 months after these specific editions were incorporated by reference 13-2 into 50.55a. In addition, Code Case N-921 and OMN-31 should be conditioned to require that they be implemented at the beginning of the ISI or IST interval, as applicable, instead of conditioning these code cases as the NRC proposed. These changes would eliminate some of the regulatory uncertainty that would result if the final rule included the NRC-proposed new definitions and conditions on Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31, and these changes would achieve the order and predictability that the NRC desires.

The issues with the proposed definitions and conditions on Code Case N-921 and OMN-31 are further discussed below.

Approved Alternatives

Under FRN Section III.E, Proposed Revision to Code of Record Update Requirements, the NRC states:

With respect to alternative requests in accordance with § 50.55a(z), the NRC will address the duration of each new authorized alternative in the safety evaluation describing its review of the request consistent with the current procedures for evaluating alternative requests. Exis ting NRC-approved alternatives were approved based on the IST or ISI interval. The proposed rulemaking language regarding the code of record interval does not extend the approval timeframe for these existing alternatives. Licensees seeking to extend the timeframe of approved alternatives therefore would need to submit an alternative request per

§ 50.55a(z) to continue using previously granted alternatives in a subsequent IST or ISI interval in the same code of record update interval. Licensees may request future alternatives based upon the code of record interval.

Although not discussed in the FRN, this statement indicates that there would be an extra burden with implementing Code Cases N-921 or OMN-31 mid-interval. Specifically, extending the authorized timeframe of an existing alternative from 10 years to 12 years would require

1 additional NRC approval. For example, the NRC staff has authorized alternatives which have eliminated certain examinations for the duration of the current 10-year interval. It is unlikely that 13-3 the bases for such authorizations considered the potential for a 12-year interval. Conditioning Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31 to require that they be implemented at the start of an interval would potentially avoid a large influx of alte rnative requests submitted to the NRC from licensees that decide to adopt these code case s mid-interval. Additionally, the NRCs draft regulatory analysis does not appear to address the additional costs associated with implementing Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31 mid-interval.

Approved Alternatives to Specific ASME Code Examination Frequencies

13-4 Currently, licensees have NRC-approved alternat ives under 10 CFR 50.55a(z) to specific Section XI examination frequencies. However, these were alternatives to the ASME BPV Code,Section XI, requirements, and not to the modified examination frequencies allowed by Code Cases N-921. The NRC should clarify if existing NRC-approved alternatives would need to be re-approved prior to implementation of Code Case N-921. Specifically, the NRC should identify whether or not existing alternatives would need to be approved as alternatives to Code Case N-921 in addition to Section XI.

Mid-Interval Updates to 2019 Edition of Section XI and 2020 Edition of OM Code

The regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and (g)(4)(iv) allow a licensee to use all or portions of a later edition of the OM Code or Section XI if approved by the NRC. Licensees may request to use a later edition at any time. For example, a licensee could request approval to use the 2019 edition of Section XI in the middle of the current 10-year interval when their code of record is the 13-5 2017 edition of Section XI. Based on the proposed rule language and statement of consideration, it is not clear if the extended code of record intervals would apply following such a mid-interval update. It is also not clear if licensees would be allowed to use Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31 under these circumstances based on the NRC-proposed conditions on these code cases.

13-1, The NRC should not apply the extended code of record intervals nor allow the use of Code 13-2 Cases N-921 and OMN-31 when a licensee uses 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) or (g)(4)(iv) to transition from an older edition to the 2019 edition (or later) of Section XI or the 2020 edition (or later) of the OM Code mid-interval. The use of these new provisions and code cases should only apply when the required code of record, ISI, and IST program updates occur. This would help ensure the order and predictability that the NRC desires.

There has been significant industry interest in adopting these new provisions and code cases. If 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and (g)(4)(iv) can be used as a means for adoption mid-interval, there will likely be a large influx of 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and (g)(4)(iv) requests to use the 2019 edition of Section XI 13-3 and the 2020 edition of the OM Code. As stated in FRN Section III.E, licensees would also need to seek new approvals for all their existing alternativ es under this situation. This would result in a significant burden on licensees and the NRC st aff which does not appear to have been considered in the regulatory analysis.

A large influx of such requests would undermi ne the order and predictability that the NRC desires. First, it is not clear that the proposed rule would allow the extended code of record intervals and Code Cases N-921 and OMN-31 to be used following a mid-interval update to a 13-5 later edition of the ASME Code. Second, the NRC staff would need to consider the implications of transitioning in the middle of a 10-year ISI/IST interval and 10-year code of record interval to

2 13-5 a possible 12-year ISI/IST interval and 24-year code of record interval on a plant-specific basis.

Third, there may be unforeseen consequences associated with making such changes mid-interval that may take additional time and effort to resolve. As a result, significant NRC and licensee resources would be needed to resolve these issues.

13-2 As noted above, it would be preferable to only allow the use of the new provisions and Code Case N-921 and OMN-31 when the next required program and code of record updates occur.

13-5 However, if the NRC wants to allow mid-interval updates, this should be done through a rule change rather than requiring the entire industry to seek plant-specific licensing actions with uncertain outcomes.

Backfit Discussion

The backfitting discussion for the proposed rule states:

The NRC is proposing to revise the requirement to update to the latest edition and addenda before the start of every other ISI and IST interval. This proposed revision would be a voluntary relaxation, and thus not a backfit, because licensees will continue to have the option to voluntarily update before the start of each ISI or IST interval under §§ 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) or (g)(4)(iv).

13-6 The claim that this proposed revision is a voluntary relaxation is incorrect. First, the update interval is mandatory, not voluntary. Second, the backfitting discussion fails to mention that the option to voluntarily update under §§ 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) or (g)(4)(iv) requires NRC approval. The regulations do not guarantee that the NRC staff will approve such a request, and the licensee incurs additional costs for the preparation and NRC re view of the application required to obtain NRC approval. The NRCs draft regulatory analysis does not consider these costs and does not identify a backfit associated with this proposed change.

Once a licensee has updated to the ASME BPV Code,Section XI, 2019 Edition, and OM Code, 2020 Edition, or later, the proposed rule would not allow a licensee to continue to update its ISI/IST code of record at the start of each ISI/IST interval without prior NRC approval. This reduces the flexibility for licensee that want to update their ISI/IST programs to take advantage of improvements in the ASME Code. The final rule should revise §§ 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and (g)(4)(iv) to allow licensees to update their code of record every interval without needing NRC approval. To ensure adequate regulatory oversite, the NRC could require the licensee to notify the NRC of its intent to either remain on the current code of record or to update to the latest edition/addenda of the ASME Code incorporated into 50.55a. If these changes are not made, the NRC should perform a backfit analysis to justify the changes to the code of record update frequency.

Additionally, the NRCs logic appears to undermine the backfit rule. The NRC argues that the proposed change is not a backfit because the lic ensee can request NRC approval to not follow the new rule. Continuing with this line of logic, no rule change would be a backfit because the regulations allow licensees to voluntarily request an exemption from the revised rule. The fact that the regulations provide a process which may allow the licensee to maintain the status quo, subject to NRC approval, is not a valid reason for determining that an action is not a backfit.

3 Condition on Code Case N-921

The proposed rule would condition Code Case N-921 as follows: The licensees code of record for the inservice inspection program must be the 2019 Edition of Section XI or later, in order to 13-2 apply this code case. Instead of this condition, the NRC should condition the use of Code Case N-921 to require that it be implemented at the start of the ISI interval rather than allowing for implementation mid-interval. The final rule could be made effective 18 months after the 2019 13-7 Edition of Section XI was incorporated into the rule to ensure that the code case is not applied to Section XI editions prior to 2019. The NRC -proposed condition has several issues as discussed below.

First, the proposed condition on Code Case N-921 and the proposed definition for code of record create ambiguity over what would be considered sufficient for the NRC to consider the code of record for the ISI program to be the 2019 Edition or later of Section XI. The regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4)(iv) allow a licensee to use all or portions of a subsequent edition of Section XI that has been incorporated into 10 CFR 50.55a if approved by the NRC. A licensee may also adopt all or portions of a later edition that has not been incorporated into 50.55a through a proposed alternative under 50.55a(z). In addition, a licensee could be approved to use all or portions of an earlier edition than required by 50.55a(g) as an alternative under 13-8 50.55a(z). The NRC should not allow the general use of Code Case N-921 when only a small portion of the code of record is on a 2019 edition or later, but most of the code of record is on an earlier edition. At the same time, the NRC should not prohibit the use of N-921 if a small portion of a licensees ISI program is on an earlier edition.

13-9 Second, it is possible for two ISI intervals to overlap, which means that two Code editions are implemented at the same time. For example, the containment ISI program may not coincide with the remainder of the ISI program. Thus, the definition for the code of record creates ambiguity when a portion of the ISI program is on an earlier edition of Section XI and another portion of the program has been updated to the 2019 edition of Section XI.

Condition on OMN-31

The proposed rule would condition OMN-31 as follows: Contrary to the ASME OM Code Case Applicability Index, this OM Code Case may only be applied by licensees implementing the ASME OM Code, 2020 Edition through the latest edition of the ASME OM Code incorporated by 13-10 reference in 10 CFR 50.55a. Requiring licen sees to implement the 2020 Edition through the latest edition is not reasonable, as the licensee cannot apply multiple editions of the OM Code to the same parts of the IST program simultaneously. If the NRC desires to retain such a condition, the condition should be changed to require licensees to implement the 2020 Edition or later. However, this is not recommended because the proposed condition on OMN-31 13-11 suffers from many of the same issues as the condition on N-921 (see section above). Thus, the 13-2 NRC should condition the use of Code Case OMN-31 to require that it be implemented at the start of the IST interval rather than allowing for implementation mid-interval.

Applicability of Code of Record Definition

13-12 The NRC should clarify whether or not the defined terms in 50.55a(y) apply to documents incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a. For example, Regulatory Guide 1.147 uses the term Code of Record in multiple places, so would the new definition of Code of Record apply to this regulatory guide?

4 Elimination of 120-Month Interval and Addition of Definitions

13-13 The proposed revisions to eliminate the references to 120-month intervals in 50.55a and add the terms code of record interval, ISI interval, and IST interval would significantly improve the clarity of 50.55a. Defining these intervals in 50.55a(y) would provide greater clarity and regulatory stability because future changes to these intervals would be done through the rulemaking process so that all stakeholders can inform the decision. The proposed rule would clarify that an individual licensee would only be able to use different intervals if special circumstances are present in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12. This would preserve the original intent of the 50.55a rule, which was to require period updates to the ISI and IST program on a timeframe consistent with Commission policy. In addition, this would ensure that the 25-year limit between code of record updates (described in the FRN) is not exceeded through the misapplication on 10 CFR 50.55a(z). However, the proposed definitions should be clarified in the final rule as discussed below.

Code of Record Definition

The proposed rule states:

Code of record means: (i) For the ASME BPV Code,Section XI, the edition (and addenda) implemented by a licensee in accordance with the requirements of this section. (ii) For the ASME OM Code, the edition (and addenda) implemented by a licensee in accordance with the requirements of this section. (iii) For the ASME BPV Code,Section III, the edition implemented by a licensee in accordance with the requirements of this section, which may vary by component.

13-14 Instead of a single definition for code of record, the final rule should have separate definitions for ISI code of record and IST code of record. A code of record definition for the construction code should not be included in the final rule as it is not necessary. The use of code of record in the proposed 50.55a rule is limited to the ASME Codes that require updates by paragraphs 50.55a(f) or (g). These updates do not include Section III of the ASME BPV Code. In addition, ASME uses the term Construction Code, which can include codes other than Section III, and not the term code of record.

The proposed definition of code of record is not c onsistent with the NRCs previous definitions of this term in NUREG-1482 and RIS 2004-12. The final rule should use definitions of ISI code of record and IST code of record consistent with these previous definitions. For example, the following definitions would be preferable as they are similar to the NRCs previous definitions (some modification would be needed to account for snubbers):

x IST code of record means the specific edition(s) and addenda of the ASME OM Code required by paragraphs (f)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section, for inservice tests to verify operational readiness of pumps and valves, whose function is required for safety.

x ISI code of record means the specific edition(s) and addenda of the ASME BPV Code,Section XI, required by paragraphs (g)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section, subject to the conditions listed in paragraph (b) of this section, for the inservice examination of components and system pressure tests.

5 13-15 Different aspects of the ISI or IST program may be on different codes of record (e.g.,

containment ISI may not align with the rest of the ISI program). The proposed definition for code of record uses the phrase the edition, which is singular and does not appear to permit the code of record to consist of multiple editions for different aspects of the program.

The regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and 50.55a(g)(4)(iv) allow a licensee to use all or portions of a later edition of the OM Code or Section XI if approved by the NRC. The NRCs proposed definition for code of record appears to exclude those portions of later editions that have been approved in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(4)(iv) and 50.55a(g)(4)(iv). This may be appropriate as implementation of the later editions, following NRC approval under these provisions, is optional. However, the NRC should clar ify whether or not all or portions of later editions approved for use under these provisions ar e part of the code of record, and revise the definition accordingly.

13-16 The code of record needs to be defined by what the NRC requires, and it should not depend on whether or not the code edition has been implemented. The code of record for the next interval is established 18 months prior to the start of the interval, even though it has not yet been implemented. As another example of why this is an issue, suppose a licensee fails to implement the 2019 edition of Section XI in accordance with the requirements of this section. Then, the proposed definition would suggest that the 2019 edition is not the code of record.

Code of Record Interval Definition

The proposed rule states:

Code of record interval means the period of time between the code of record updates required by paragraphs (f)(4) and (g)(4) of this section for the inservice inspection and inservice examination and test programs, respectively.

(i) For licensees with codes of record prior to ASME BPV Code,Section XI, 2019 Edition, and OM Code, 2020 Edition, as incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of this section, the code of record interval is the same as the inspection interval or inservice examination and test interval.

(ii) For licensees with codes of record of ASME BPV Code,Section XI, 2019 Edition and OM Code, 2020 Edition, or later, as incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of this section, the code of record interval is two consecutive inservice inspection or inservice examination and test intervals.

13-17 The proposed definition of the code of record interval incorrectly states that ISI is under 13-18 paragraph (f)(4) and IST is under paragraph (g)(4). The definition also creates some ambiguity about the snubber program. The definition does not encompass the initial code of record interval 13-19 because the initial code of record is not an update. The definition should also be revised to allow for the code of record to be voluntarily updated every ISI/IST interval.

13-1 As discussed above, the proposed revision to the update interval should be tied to the effective date of the proposed rule. For ISI/IST intervals that started prior to the effective date of the final rule, the code of record interval should be the same as the ISI/IST interval. For ISI/IST intervals that start after the effective date of the final rule, the code of record interval should be equal to (A) one ISI/IST interval for licensees that elect to update the code of record for the subsequent ISI/IST interval or (B) two consecutive ISI/IST intervals.

6 IST Interval and Inspection Interval Definitions

The IST interval and inspection intervals need to be clearly defined in the regulations to distinguish them from the code of record inte rval definition. The proposed rule states:

Inservice examination and test (IST) interval, for the purposes of this section, means the inservice examination and test interval described by the licensees code of record (paragraph ISTA-3120 of the ASME OM Code, 2001 Edition through 2009 Edition, or paragraph ISTA-3120 of the ASME OM Code, 2012 Edition and later).

Inspection interval, as used in this section, means the inservice inspection interval described by the licensees code of record (Article IWA-2432 of ASME BPV Code,Section XI, 1989 Edition with 1991 Addenda through the 2008 Addenda, or Article IWA-2431 of ASME BPV Code,Section XI, 2009 Addenda and later).

13-20 Code cases cannot provide alternatives to NRC r egulations unless explicitly permitted by the regulations. However, the proposed definitions of t he IST interval and inspection interval do not allow for the modification of these intervals by Code Cases OMN-31 and N-921. There is also not a provision currently in 50.55a that would allow code cases to provide alternatives to the proposed definitions. For both the BPV Code,Section XI, and OM Code, the NRCs proposed definition for the code of record means the edition (and addenda) implemented by a licensee in accordance with the requirements of this section. Thus, the definition for the code of record does not include code cases, as these are not the edition or addenda. Additionally, the specific paragraphs within the OM Code (e.g., ISTA-3120) and Section XI (e.g., IWA-2431) are specified in the proposed interval definitions, but the proposed definitions do not permit alternatives to these paragraphs.

13-18 In addition, these proposed definitions do not appear to encompass the snubber program.

Augmented Inspections

The regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(E) specify augmented reactor coolant pressure boundary visual inspections. Footnote 10 to this regulation states, in part:

For inspections to be conducted once per interval, the inspections must be performed in accordance with the schedule in Section XI, paragraph IWB-2400, except for plants with inservice inspection programs based on a Section XI edition or addenda prior to the 1994 Addenda.

13-21 As noted above, code cases cannot provide altern atives to NRC regulations unless explicitly permitted by the regulations. The final rule should clarify whether or not Code Case N-921 can be applied to these augmented inspections.

Code Case N-921

Code Case N-921 provides an alternative to the Section XI requirements in paragraphs IWA-2430 and IWA-2431 and tables IWB-2411-1, IWC-2411-1, IWD-2411-1, IWE-2411-1, and IWF-2410-1. Subparagraph IWA-2430(a) of Section XI states: The inspections shall be performed

7 in accordance with the schedule of the Inspection Program of IWA-2431. As an alternative to thisSection XI requirement, subparagraph -2430(a) of Code Case N-921 states (emphasis added): The inspections shall be performed in accordance with the schedule of the inspection program of -2431 and Table 1. Thus, the code case includes an inspection scheduling requirement (i.e., Table 1) that is not in IWA-2430(a).

Section XI, paragraphs IWB-2411, IWC-2411, etc., require the percentage of examinations in each examination category to be completed in accordance with tables IWB-2411-1, 13-22 IWC-2411-1, etc. (as applicable), with exceptions. However, Code Case N-921 does not identify any exceptions to Table 1 for paragraph -2431. A plain language reading would lead to the conclusion that subparagraph -2430(a) requires compliance with Table 1, without exception, for licensees that choose to use Code Case N-921.

The NRC should condition Code Case N-921 to make the Section XI exceptions to tables IWB-2411-1, IWC-2411-1, etc. applicable to subparagraph -2430(a) of Code Case N-921. Such a condition would avoid the need for licensees to request alternatives to this provision in Code Case N-921.

Code Case N-860

13-23 Code Case N-860 should not be endorsed in RG 1.174 and should not be incorporated in 10 CFR 50.55a. Code Case N-860 provides inspection requirements and evaluation standards for spent nuclear fuel storage and transportation containment systems. These systems are not systems, structures, or components of a producti on or utilization facility. Therefore, these systems are not within the scope of 10 CFR Part 50 and not within the scope of Part 50 or 52 licenses. Instead, spent nuclear fuel storage and transportation containment systems are regulated and licensed under 10 CFR Parts 71 and 72. The regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a do not apply to these systems and do not extend to 10 CFR Parts 71 and 72 (e.g., there are no references to 50.55a in Parts 71 or 72). In addition, the use of such systems is not limited to nuclear power plant licensees and applicants.

RG 1.147 is for code cases that the NRC has approved for use as voluntary alternative to the mandatory ASME BPV Code provisions that are inco rporated by reference in 10 CFR Part 50.

There are no mandatory ASME BPV Code provisions for spent nuclear fuel storage and transportation containment systems in 10 CFR Part 50. In fact, Code Case N-860 does not appear to provide an alternative to any ASME BPV Code provisions. Thus, it is not appropriate to endorse this code case in RG 1.147.

The FRN does not explain how this code case is compatible with the regulations, including the certificates of compliance, in 10 CFR Parts 71 and 72. For example, the code case states that it applies to canisters during the storage period of extended operation, which starts after the initial license period. This is ambiguous and could be interpreted as a change in staff position regarding when the aging management program begins. For generally licensed ISFSIs, the aging management program for such systems is not tied to the duration of the ISFSI license because the general license is not a fixed term. The aging management program for such systems is also not tied to the duration of the reactor license. If the NRC wants to endorse Code Case N-860, then it should consider doing this under a separate regulatory action that fully considers the impact to the regulations, certificates of compliance, and ISFSI licensees.

8