7820 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

The NRC will consider any comments 

received on the regulatory basis in the 

development of the proposed and final 

rule and will provide responses to 

comments on the regulatory basis in the 

associated Federal Register notification 

publishing the proposed rule for public 

comment. 

III. Plain Writing 

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. 

L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to 

write documents in a clear, concise, and 

well-organized manner. The NRC has 

written this document to be consistent 

with the Plain Writing Act as well as the 

Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing,’’ 

published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). 

The NRC requests comment on this 

document with respect to the clarity and 

effectiveness of the language used. 

IV. Availability of Documents 

The documents identified in the 

following table are available to 

interested persons through one or more 

of the following methods, as indicated. 

Document ADAMS accession No./web link/ 

Federal Register citation 

Regulatory Basis for Items Containing Byproduct Material Incidental to Production, January 

13, 2021.

ML20339A400. 

Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by Annette User on Behalf of GE Osmonics (Consideration in the Rulemaking Process), September 14, 2012.77 FR 56793. 

GE Osmonics, Inc., Polymer Track Etch Membrane 10 CFR 32.14—Manufacturer and Distribution Product Safety Information, March 20, 2012.ML120800277. 

GE Osmonics, Inc., Environmental Report—Polymer Track Etch Membrane—10 CFR 30.15, 

March 20, 2012.

ML120800264. 

NRC Consumer Product Policy Statement, January 16, 2014 .................................................. 79 FR 2907. 

Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by Annette User on Behalf of GE Osmonics, April 18, 

2011.

ML120250133. 

SECY–87–186A, Distribution of Radioactive Gems Irradiated in Reactors to Unlicensed Persons (Follow-up to SECY–87–186), October 5, 1987.ML092400170. 

Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by Annette User on Behalf of GE Osmonics (Receipt and 

Request for Comment), June 22, 2011.

76 FR 36386. 

Comment (1) of Benjamin Kerensa Opposing Petition for Rulemaking (PRM–30–65) Regarding the NRC Amend Its Regulations Regarding the Commercial Distribution of Byproduct 

Material, June 24, 2011.

ML11178A021. 

Agreement State Program Policy Statement; Correction, October 18, 2017 ............................ 82 FR 48535. 

Management Directive 5.3, Agreement State Participation in NRC Working Groups, June 22, 

2016.

ML18073A142. 

NUREG–1556, Volume 8, Revision 1, Consolidated Guidance about Materials Licenses: 

Program-Specific Guidance About Exempt Distribution Licenses, June 2018.

ML18158A165. 

Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2018–2022, NUREG–1614, Volume 7, February 2018 ............... ML18032A561. 

International Atomic Energy Agency, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Radiation Safety for 

Consumer Products, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG–36, January 2016.

https://www.iaea.org/publications/10716/radiationsafety-for-consumer-products. 

International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA Safety Standards Series, Radiation Protection 

and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards—General Safety 

Requirements Part 3 No. GSR Part 3, July 2014.

https://www.iaea.org/publications/8930/radiationprotection-and-safety-of-radiation-sources-international-basic-safety-standards. 

The NRC may post documents related 

to this rulemaking activity to the 

Federal rulemaking website at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

NRC–2015–0017. 

The Federal rulemaking website 

allows you to receive alerts when 

changes or additions occur in a docket 

folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the 

docket folder (NRC–2015–0017); (2) 

click the ‘‘Sign up for Email Alerts’’ 

link; and (3) enter your email address 

and select how frequently you would 

like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or 

monthly). 

Dated January 15, 2021. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

John R. Tappert, 

Director, Division of Rulemaking, 

Environmental, and Financial Support, Office 

of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02158 Filed 2–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 50 

[NRC–2017–0025] 

RIN 3150–AJ94 

Approval of American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers’ Code Cases 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is proposing to 

amend its regulations to incorporate by 

reference proposed revisions of three 

regulatory guides, which would approve 

new, revised, and reaffirmed Code Cases 

published by the American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers. The NRC is also 

incorporating by reference one NRC 

NUREG associated with a proposed 

condition on one of the regulatory 

guides. This proposed action would 

allow nuclear power plant licensees, 

and applicants for construction permits, 

operating licenses, combined licenses, 

standard design certifications, standard 

design approvals and manufacturing 

licenses, to use the Code Cases listed in 

these draft regulatory guides as 

voluntary alternatives to engineering 

standards for the construction, inservice 

inspection, and inservice testing of 

nuclear power plant components. The 

NRC is requesting comments on this 

proposed rule and on the draft versions 

of the three regulatory guides proposed 

to be incorporated by reference. The 

NRC is also making available a related 

draft regulatory guide that lists Code 

Cases that the NRC has not approved for 

use. This draft regulatory guide will not 

be incorporated by reference into the 

NRC’s regulations. 

DATES: Submit comments on the 

proposed rule, documents to be 

incorporated by reference, and related 

guidance by April 5, 2021. Submit 

comments specific to the information 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7821 

collections aspects of this rule by March 

4, 2021. Comments received after these 

dates will be considered if it is practical 

to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure 

consideration only of comments 

received on or before these dates. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule, documents to be 

incorporated by reference, and related 

guidance by any of the following 

methods (unless this document 

describes a different method for 

submitting comments on a specific 

subject): 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2017–0025. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Dawn 

Forder; telephone: 301–415–3407; 

email: Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions contact the 

individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• Email comments to: 

Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you 

do not receive an automatic email reply 

confirming receipt, then contact us at 

301–415–1677. 

• Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. 

For additional direction on obtaining 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juan 

Lopez, Office of Nuclear Material Safety 

and Safeguards; telephone: 301–415– 

2338; email: Juan.Lopez@nrc.gov; or 

Bruce Lin, Office of Nuclear Regulatory 

Research; telephone: 301–415–2446; 

email: Bruce.Lin@nrc.gov. Both are staff 

of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

A. Need for the Regulatory Action 

The purpose of this regulatory action 

is to incorporate by reference into the 

NRC’s regulations the latest revisions of 

three regulatory guides (RGs) (currently 

in draft form for comment). This 

regulatory action is also incorporating 

by reference one NRC report, NUREG– 

2228, that is associated with a proposed 

conditon in one of the regulatory guides. 

NUREG–2228 was published for public 

comment on September 13, 2018 (83 FR 

46524). The three draft RGs identify 

new, revised, and reaffirmed Code Cases 

published by the American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers (ASME), which 

the NRC has determined are acceptable 

for use as voluntary alternatives to 

compliance with certain provisions of 

the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel 

Code (BPV Code) and the ASME Code 

for Operation and Maintenance of 

Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) 

currently incorporated by reference into 

the NRC’s regulations. 

B. Major Provisions 

The three draft RGs that the NRC 

proposes to incorporate by reference are 

RG 1.84, ‘‘Design, Fabrication, and 

Materials Code Case Acceptability, 

ASME Section III,’’ Revision 39 (Draft 

Regulatory Guide (DG)–1366); RG 1.147, 

‘‘Inservice Inspection Code Case 

Acceptability, ASME Section XI, 

Division 1,’’ Revision 20 (DG–1367); and 

RG 1.192, ‘‘Operation and Maintenance 

[OM] Code Case Acceptability, ASME 

OM Code,’’ Revision 4 (DG–1368). The 

NRC also proposes to incorporate by 

reference NUREG–2228, ‘‘Weld Residual 

Stress Finite Element Analysis 

Validation: Part II—Proposed Validation 

Procedure,’’ which provides the 

procedure for validating the weld 

residual stress analysis methodology 

associated with ASME Code Case N– 

847. This proposed action would allow 

nuclear power plant licensees and 

applicants for construction permits, 

operating licenses, combined licenses, 

standard design certifications, standard 

design approvals, and manufacturing 

licenses to use the Code Cases newly 

listed in these revised RGs as voluntary 

alternatives to engineering standards for 

the construction, inservice inspections, 

and inservice testing of nuclear power 

plant components. The NRC also notes 

the availability of a proposed version of 

RG 1.193, ‘‘ASME Code Cases Not 

Approved for Use,’’ Revision 7 (DG– 

1369). This document lists Code Cases 

that the NRC has not approved for 

generic use and will not be incorporated 

by reference into the NRC’s regulations. 

The NRC prepared a draft regulatory 

analysis to determine the expected 

quantitative costs and benefits of this 

proposed rule, as well as qualitative 

factors to be considered in the NRC’s 

rulemaking decision. The analysis 

concluded that this proposed rule 

would result in net savings to the 

industry and the NRC. As shown in 

Table 1, the estimated total net benefit 

relative to the regulatory baseline and 

the quantitative benefits outweigh the 

costs by a range from approximately 

$5.19 million (7-percent net present 

value) to $6.20 million (3-percent net 

present value). 

TABLE 1—COST BENEFIT SUMMARY

Attribute 

Total averted costs 

(costs) 

Undiscounted 7% Net 

present value 

3% Net 

present value 

Industry Implementation .............................................................................................................. $0 $0 $0 

Industry Operation ....................................................................................................................... 5,100,000 3,790,000 4,470,000 

Total Industry Costs ............................................................................................................. 5,100,000 3,790,000 4,470,000 

NRC Implementation ................................................................................................................... (430,000) (420,000) (420,000) 

NRC Operation ............................................................................................................................ 2,460,000 1,820,000 2,150,000 

Total NRC Costs .................................................................................................................. 2,030,000 1,400,000 1,730,000 

Net ................................................................................................................................. 7,130,000 5,190,000 6,200,000 

The regulatory analysis also 

considered the following qualitative 

considerations: (1) Flexibility and 

decreased uncertainty for licensees 

when making modifications or 

preparing to perform inservice 

inspection or inservice testing; (2) 

consistency with the provisions of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995, which 

encourages Federal regulatory agencies 

to consider adopting voluntary 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7822 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1The editions and addenda of the ASME Code for 

Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power 

Plants have had different titles from 2005 to 2017, 

and are referred to as the ‘‘OM Code’’ collectively 

in this rule. 

2See Federal Register final rule, ‘‘Incorporation 

by Reference of ASME BPV and OM Code Cases’’ 

(68 FR 40469; July 8, 2003). 

3Code Cases are categorized by the ASME as one 

of three types: new, revised, or reaffirmed. A new 

Code Case provides for a new alternative to specific 

the ASME Code provisions or addresses a new 

need. The ASME defines a revised Code Case to be 

a revision (modification) to an existing Code Case 

to address, for example, technological 

advancements in examination techniques or to 

address NRC conditions imposed in one of the RGs 

that have been incorporated by reference into 

§ 50.55a. The ASME defines ‘‘reaffirmed’’ as an OM 

Code Case that does not have any change to 

technical content, but includes editorial changes. 

consensus standards as an alternative to 

de novo agency development of 

standards affecting an industry; (3) 

consistency with the NRC’s policy of 

evaluating the latest versions of 

consensus standards in terms of their 

suitability for endorsement by 

regulations and regulatory guides; and 

(4) consistency with the NRC’s goal to 

harmonize with international standards 

to improve regulatory efficiency for both 

the NRC and international standards 

groups. 

The draft regulatory analysis 

concludes that this proposed rule 

should be adopted because it is justified 

when integrating the cost-beneficial 

quantitative results and the positive and 

supporting nonquantitative 

considerations in the decision. For more 

information, please see the regulatory 

analysis (Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS) Accession No. 

ML20133K152). 

Table of Contents 

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting 

Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

B. Submitting Comments 

II. Background 

III. Discussion 

A. Code Cases Proposed To Be Approved 

for Unconditional Use 

B. Code Cases Proposed To Be Approved 

for Use With Conditions 

1. ASME BPV Code, Section III Code Cases 

(DG–1366/RG 1.84) 

2. ASME BPV Code, Section XI Code Cases 

(DG–1367/RG 1.147) 

3. OM Code Cases (DG–1368/RG 1.192) 

C. ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use 

(DG–1369/RG 1.193) 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis 

V. Regulatory Flexibility Certification 

VI. Regulatory Analysis 

VII. Backfitting and Issue Finality 

VIII. Plain Writing 

IX. Environmental Assessment and Proposed 

Finding of No Significant Environmental 

Impact 

X. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement 

XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards 

XII. Incorporation by Reference—Reasonable 

Availability to Interested Parties 

XIII. Availability of Documents 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2017– 

0025 when contacting the NRC about 

the availability of information for this 

action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this 

action by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2017–0025. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then 

select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS 

Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, 

please contact the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 

1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by 

email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For the 

convenience of the reader, instructions 

about obtaining materials referenced in 

this document are provided in the 

‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section. 

• Attention: The PDR, where you may 

examine and order copies of public 

documents is currently closed. You may 

submit your request to the PDR via 

email at pdr.resource@nrc.gov or call 

1–800–397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 

4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

B. Submitting Comments 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2017– 

0025 in your comment submission. 

The NRC cautions you not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in your comment submission. 

The NRC will post all comment 

submissions at https://

www.regulations.gov as well as enter the 

comment submissions into ADAMS. 

The NRC does not routinely edit 

comment submissions to remove 

identifying or contact information. 

If you are requesting or aggregating 

comments from other persons for 

submission to the NRC, then you should 

inform those persons not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

they do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in their comment submission. 

Your request should state that the NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove such information 

before making the comment 

submissions available to the public or 

entering the comment into ADAMS. 

II. Background 

The ASME develops and publishes 

the ASME BPV Code, which contains 

requirements for the design, 

construction, and inservice inspection 

examination of nuclear power plant 

components, and the ASME OM Code,1

which contains requirements for 

inservice testing of nuclear power plant 

components. In response to BPV and 

OM Code user requests, the ASME 

develops Code Cases that provide 

voluntary alternatives to BPV and OM 

Code requirements under special 

circumstances. 

The NRC approves the ASME BPV 

and OM Codes in § 50.55a, ‘‘Codes and 

standards,’’ of title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) through 

the process of incorporation by 

reference. As such, each provision of the 

ASME Codes incorporated by reference 

into and mandated by § 50.55a 

constitutes a legally-binding NRC 

requirement imposed by rule. As noted 

previously, the ASME Code Cases, for 

the most part, represent alternative 

approaches for complying with 

provisions of the ASME BPV and OM 

Codes. Accordingly, the NRC 

periodically amends § 50.55a to 

incorporate by reference the NRC’s RGs 

listing approved ASME Code Cases that 

may be used as voluntary alternatives to 

the BPV and OM Codes.2

This proposed rule is the latest in a 

series of rules that incorporate by 

reference new versions of several RGs 

identifying new, revised, and 

reaffirmed,3 and unconditionally or 

conditionally acceptable ASME Code 

Cases that the NRC approves for use. In 

developing these RGs, the NRC reviews 

the ASME BPV and OM Code Cases, 

determines the acceptability of each 

Code Case, and publishes its findings in 

the RGs. The RGs are revised 

periodically as new Code Cases are 

published by the ASME. The NRC 

incorporates by reference the RGs listing 

acceptable and conditionally acceptable 

ASME Code Cases into § 50.55a. The 

NRC published a final rule dated March 

16, 2020 (85 FR 14736) that 

incorporated by reference into § 50.55a 

the most recent versions of the RGs, 

which are: RG 1.84, ‘‘Design, 

Fabrication, and Materials Code Case 

Acceptability, ASME Section III,’’ 

Revision 38; RG 1.147, ‘‘Inservice 

Inspection Code Case Acceptability, 

ASME Section XI, Division 1,’’ Revision 

19; and RG 1.192, ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, 

ASME OM Code,’’ Revision 3. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7823 

III. Discussion 

This proposed rule would incorporate 

by reference NUREG–2228 and the latest 

revisions of the NRC’s RGs that list the 

ASME BPV and OM Code Cases that the 

NRC finds to be acceptable, or 

acceptable with NRC-specified 

conditions (‘‘conditionally acceptable’’). 

Regulatory Guide 1.84, Revision 39 

(DG–1366) would supersede the 

incorporation by reference of Revision 

38; RG 1.147, Revision 20 (DG–1367) 

would supersede the incorporation by 

reference of Revision 19; and RG 1.192, 

Revision 4 (DG–1368) would supersede 

the incorporation by reference of 

Revision 3. 

The ASME Code Cases that are the 

subject of this proposed rule are the new 

and revised Section III and Section XI 

Code Cases as listed in Supplements 0 

through 7 to the 2015 Edition of the 

ASME BPV Code, Supplements 0 

through 7 to the 2017 Edition of the 

ASME BPV Code, Supplements 0 and 1 

to the 2019 Edition of the ASME BPV 

Code, and the OM Code Cases listed in 

the 2020 Edition of the ASME OM Code. 

The latest editions and addenda of the 

ASME BPV and OM Codes that the NRC 

has approved for use are referenced in 

§ 50.55a. The ASME also publishes 

Code Cases that provide alternatives to 

existing Code requirements that the 

ASME developed and approved. This 

proposed rule would incorporate by 

reference the most recent revisions of 

RGs 1.84, 1.147, and 1.192, which allow 

nuclear power plant licensees, and 

applicants for combined licenses, 

standard design certifications, standard 

design approvals, and manufacturing 

licenses under the regulations that 

govern license certifications, to use the 

Code Cases listed in these RGs as 

suitable alternatives to the ASME BPV 

and OM Codes for the construction, 

inservice inspections, and inservice 

testing of nuclear power plant 

components. Because the NRC is 

proposing to require the use of NUREG– 

2228, ‘‘Weld Residual Stress Finite 

Element Analysis Validation: Part II— 

Proposed Validation Procedure,’’ within 

a condition on Code Case N–847, the 

NRC is also incorporating by reference 

NUREG–2228. The ASME publishes the 

OM Code Cases and lists the Code Cases 

in the ASME OM Code edition. In 

contrast, the ASME publishes BPV Code 

Cases in a separate document and at a 

different time than the ASME BPV Code 

Editions. This proposed rule identifies 

the Code Cases by the edition of the 

ASME BPV Code or ASME OM Code 

under which they were published by the 

ASME. 

The following general guidance 

applies to the use of the ASME Code 

Cases approved in the latest versions of 

the RGs that are incorporated by 

reference into § 50.55a as part of this 

proposed rule. Specifically, the use of 

the Code Cases listed in the latest 

versions of RGs 1.84, 1.147, and 1.192 

are acceptable with the specified 

conditions when implementing the 

editions and addenda of the ASME BPV 

and OM Codes incorporated by 

reference in § 50.55a. 

The approval of a Code Case in the 

NRC’s RGs constitutes acceptance of its 

technical position for applications that 

are not precluded by regulatory or other 

requirements or by the 

recommendations in these or other RGs. 

The applicant or licensee is responsible 

for ensuring that use of the Code Case 

does not conflict with regulatory 

requirements or licensee commitments. 

The Code Cases listed in the RGs are 

acceptable for use within the limits 

specified in the Code Cases. If the RG 

states an NRC condition on the use of 

a Code Case, then the NRC condition 

supplements and does not supersede 

any condition(s) specified in the Code 

Case, unless otherwise stated in the 

NRC condition. 

The ASME Code Cases may be revised 

for many reasons (e.g., to incorporate 

operational examination and testing 

experience and to update material 

requirements based on research results). 

On occasion, an inaccuracy in an 

equation is discovered or an 

examination, as practiced, is found not 

to be adequate to detect a newly 

discovered degradation mechanism. 

Therefore, when an applicant or a 

licensee initially implements a Code 

Case, § 50.55a requires that the 

applicant or the licensee implement the 

most recent version of that Code Case, 

as listed in the RGs incorporated by 

reference. Code Cases superseded by 

revision are no longer acceptable for 

new applications unless otherwise 

indicated. 

Section III of the ASME BPV Code 

applies to new construction (i.e., the 

edition and addenda to be used in the 

construction of a plant are selected 

based on the date of the construction 

permit and are not changed thereafter, 

except voluntarily by the applicant or 

the licensee). Hence, if a Section III 

Code Case is implemented by an 

applicant or a licensee and a later 

version of the Code Case is incorporated 

by reference into § 50.55a and listed in 

the RG, the applicant or licensee may 

use either version of the Code Case 

(subject, however, to whatever change 

requirements apply to its licensing basis 

(e.g., § 50.59)) until the next mandatory 

inservice inspection or inservice testing 

update. 

A licensee’s inservice inspection and 

inservice testing programs must be 

updated every 10 years to the latest 

edition and addenda of the ASME BPV 

Code, Section XI, and the OM Code, 

respectively, that were incorporated by 

reference into § 50.55a and in effect 18 

months prior to the start of the next 

inspection and testing interval. 

Licensees that were using a Code Case 

prior to the effective date of its revision 

may continue to use the previous 

version for the remainder of the 120- 

month inservice inspection or inservice 

testing interval. This relieves licensees 

of the burden of having to update their 

inservice inspection or inservice testing 

program each time a Code Case is 

revised by the ASME and approved for 

use by the NRC. Code Cases apply to 

specific editions and addenda, and Code 

Cases may be revised if they are no 

longer accurate or adequate, so licensees 

choosing to continue using a Code Case 

during the subsequent inservice 

inspection or inservice testing interval 

must implement the latest version 

incorporated by reference into § 50.55a 

and listed in the RGs. 

The ASME may annul Code Cases that 

are no longer required, are determined 

to be inaccurate or inadequate, or have 

been incorporated into the BPV or OM 

Codes. A Code Case may be revised, for 

example, to incorporate user experience. 

The older or superseded version of the 

Code Case cannot be applied by the 

licensee or applicant for the first time. 

If an applicant or a licensee applied 

a Code Case before it was listed as 

superseded, the applicant or the 

licensee may continue to use the Code 

Case until the applicant or the licensee 

updates its construction Code of Record 

(in the case of an applicant, updates its 

application) or until the licensee’s 120- 

month inservice inspection or inservice 

testing update interval expires, after 

which the continued use of the Code 

Case is prohibited unless NRC 

authorization is given under § 50.55a(z). 

If a Code Case is incorporated by 

reference into § 50.55a and later a 

revised version is issued by the ASME 

because experience has shown that the 

design analysis, construction method, 

examination method, or testing method 

is inadequate, the NRC will amend 

§ 50.55a and the relevant RG to remove 

the approval of the superseded Code 

Case. Applicants and licensees should 

not begin to implement such superseded 

Code Cases in advance of the 

rulemaking. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7824 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

A. Code Cases Proposed To Be 

Approved for Unconditional Use 

The Code Cases discussed in Table I 

are new, revised, or reaffirmed Code 

Cases in which the NRC is not 

proposing any conditions. The table 

identifies the draft regulatory guide 

listing the applicable Code Case that the 

NRC proposes to approve for use. 

TABLE I—ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III 

(addressed in DG–1366, Table 1) 

N–249–17 .................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Additional Materials for Subsection NF, Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC Supports Fabricated without Welding, Section III, Division 1. 

N–539–1 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. UNS N08367 in Class 2 and 3 Valves, Section III, Division 1. 

N–692–1 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Use of Standard Welding Procedures, Section III, Division 1. 

N–721–1 ...................... 5 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Rules for Linear Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1. 

N–801–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Rules for Repair of N-Stamped Class 1, 2, and 3 Components, Section III, Division 1. 

N–822–4 ...................... 7 (2015 Edition) ............. Application of the ASME Certification Mark, Section III, Divisions 1, 2, 3, and 5. 

N–855 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. SB–148 C95800 Valves for Class 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1. 

N–856 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. SA–494 Grade CW–12MW (UNS N30002) Nickel Alloy Castings for Construction of NPS 

21⁄2 and Smaller Flanged Valves for Class 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1. 

N–859 .......................... 5 (2015 Edition) ............. Construction of ASME B16.9 Wrought Buttwelding Fittings and ASME B16.11 Forged Fittings Made From SB–366 UNS N04400 Material for Section III, Class 3 Construction, 

Section III, Division 1. 

N–863–1 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Post Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT) of Valve Seal Welds for P4 and P5A Materials, Section 

III, Division 1. 

N–866 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Materials for Construction of Section III, Class 2 Vessels, Section III, Division 1. 

N–870–1 ...................... 4 (2017 Edition) ............. Rules for the Elimination of External Surface Defects on Class 1, 2, and 3 Piping, Pumps, 

or Valves After Component Stamping and Prior to Completion of the N–3 Data Report, 

Section III, Division 1. 

N–879 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Micro-Alloyed Carbon Steel Bar in Patented Mechanical Joints and Fittings, Classes 

1, 2, and 3, Section III, Division 1. 

N–884 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Procedure to Determine Strain Rate for Use with the Environmental Fatigue Design Curve 

Method and the Environmental Fatigue Correction Factor, Fen, Method as Part of an Environmental Fatigue Evaluation for Components Analyzed per the NB–3200 Rules, Section III, Division 1. 

N–887 .......................... 6 (with errata issued in 

3/19E).

Alternatives to the Requirements of NB–4424.2(a), Figure NB–4250–2, and Figure NB– 

4250–3, Section III, Division 1. 

N–891 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements to Appendix XXVI, XXVI–2400, XXVI–4130, and XXVI–4131 for 

Inspection and Repair of Indentations for Polyethylene Pipe and Piping Components, 

Section III, Division 1. 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI 

(addressed in DG–1367, Table 1) 

N–561–3 ...................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Wall Thickness Restoration of Class 2 and High Energy Class 

3 Carbon Steel Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–638–10 .................... 1 (2019 Edition) ............. Similar and Dissimilar Metal Welding Using Ambient Temperature Machine GTAW Temper 

Bead Technique, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–653–2 ...................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. Qualification Requirements for Full Structural Overlaid Wrought Austenitic Piping Welds, 

Section XI, Division 1. 

N–702–1 ...................... 1 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) Nozzle Inner Radius and Nozzle-to-Shell Welds, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–716–2 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Piping Classification and Examination Requirements, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–768 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Volumetric Coverage Requirements for Ultrasonic Examination of Class 1 and 2 

Pressure Vessel Weld Joints Greater Than 2 in. (50 mm) in Thickness, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–786–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Sleeve Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Moderate Energy 

Carbon Steel Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–789–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Pad Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Moderate Energy Carbon Steel Piping for Raw Water Service, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–809 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. Reference Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Curves for Austenitic Stainless Steels in Pressurized Reactor Water Environments, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–845–1 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Qualification Requirements for Bolts and Studs, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–848–1 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Characterization Rules for Quasi-Laminar Flaws, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–851 .......................... 0 (2015 Edition) ............. Alternate Method for Establishing the Reference Temperature for Pressure Retaining Materials, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–858 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Volumetric Coverage Requirements for Ultrasonic Examination of Class 1 Nozzle-to-Vessel Welds, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–865 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Pad Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Atmospheric Storage 

Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–867 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Clarification of NDE Practical Examination Requirements, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–873 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Examination Requirements for the Core Makeup Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7825 

TABLE I—ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES—Continued 

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

N–874 .......................... 7 (2017 Edition) ............. Temporary Acceptance of Leakage Through Brazed Joints of Class 3 Copper, CopperNickel, and Nickel-Copper Moderate Energy Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–877 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Characterization Rules for Multiple Subsurface Radially Oriented Planar Flaws, 

Section XI, Division 1. 

N–882 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Attaching Nonstructural Electrical Connections to Class 2 and 

3 Components, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–885 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Table IWB–2500–1, Examination Category B–N–1, Interior of 

Reactor Vessel, Category B–N–2, Welded Core Support Structures and Interior Attachments to Reactor Vessels, Category B–N–3, Removable Core Support Structures, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–892 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirement for Form OAR–1, Owner’s Activity Report, Completion Time, Section XI, Division 1. 

Operation and Maintenance Code 

(addressed in DG–1368, Table 1) 

OMN–13, Revision 3 ... 2020 Edition ................... Performance-Based Requirements for Extending Snubber Inservice Visual Examination Interval at LWR Power Plants. 

OMN–15, Revision 3 ... 2020 Edition ................... Performance-Based Requirements for Extending the Snubber Operational Readiness Testing Interval at LWR Power Plants. 

OMN–17, Revision 1 ... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing ASME Class 1 Pressure Relief/Safety Valves. 

OMN–22 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Smooth Running Pumps. 

OMN–23 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Pressure Isolation Valves. 

OMN–24 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing ASME Class 2 and 3 Pressure Relief Valves (For Relief Valves in a Group of One). 

OMN–25 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Appendix I Pressure Relief Valves. 

OMN–26 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternate Risk-Informed and Margin Based Rules for Inservice Testing of Motor Operated 

Valves. 

OMN–27 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Category A Valves (Non-PIV/CIV). 

B. Code Cases Approved for Use With 

Conditions 

The NRC has determined that certain 

Code Cases, as issued by the ASME, are 

generally acceptable for use, but that the 

alternative requirements specified in 

those Code Cases must be supplemented 

in order to provide an acceptable level 

of quality and safety. Accordingly, the 

NRC proposes to impose conditions on 

the use of these Code Cases to modify, 

limit or clarify their requirements. The 

conditions would specify, for each 

applicable Code Case, the additional 

activities that must be performed, the 

limits on the activities specified in the 

Code Case, and/or the supplemental 

information needed to provide clarity. 

These ASME Code Cases, listed in Table 

II, are included in Table 2 of DG–1366 

(RG 1.84), DG–1367 (RG 1.147), and 

DG–1368 (RG 1.192). This section 

provides the NRC’s evaluation of the 

Code Cases and the reasons for the 

NRC’s conditions. Notations indicate 

the conditions duplicated from previous 

versions of the RG. 

The NRC requests public comment on 

these Code Cases and the proposed 

conditions. It should also be noted that 

this section only addresses those Code 

Cases for which the NRC proposes to 

impose condition(s), which are listed in 

the RG for the first time. 

TABLE II—CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III 

(addressed in DG–1366, Table 2) 

N–71–20 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Additional Materials for Subsection NF, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Supports Fabricated by 

Welding, Section III, Division 1. 

N–155–3 ...................... 5 (2015 Edition) ............. Fiberglass Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Pipe, Section III, Division 1. 

N–755–4 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Polyethylene (PE) Class 3 Plastic Pipe, Section III, Division 1. 

N–779 .......................... 9 (2007 Edition) ............. Alternative Rules for Simplified Elastic-Plastic Analysis Class 1, Section III, Division 1. 

N–852 .......................... 0 (2015 Edition) ............. Application of the ASME NPT Stamp, Section III, Divisions 1, 2, 3, and 5. 

N–883 .......................... 5 (2017 Edition) ............. Construction of Items Prior to the Establishment of a Section III, Division 1 Owner, Section 

III, Division 1. 

N–886 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Polyethylene Pipe for Class 3, Section III, Division 1. 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI 

(addressed in DG–1367, Table 2) 

N–513–5 ...................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in Moderate Energy Class 2 or 3 

Piping and Gate Valves, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–516–5 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Underwater Welding, Section XI, Division 1. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7826 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE II—CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES—Continued 

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

N–705–1 ...................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Degradation in Moderate Energy Class 2 

or 3 Vessels and Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–766–3 ...................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Nickel Alloy Reactor Coolant Inlay and Onlay for Mitigation of PWR Full Penetration Circumferential Nickel Alloy Dissimilar Metal Welds in Class 1 Items, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–831–1 ...................... 7 (2017 Edition) ............. Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of Radiography for Welds in Ferritic or Austenitic Pipe, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–847 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Partial Excavation and Deposition of Weld Metal for Mitigation of Class 1 Items, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

N–864 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Reactor Vessel Threads in Flange Examinations, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–869 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in Class 2 or 3 Piping, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

N–876 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Austenitic Stainless Steel Cladding and Nickel Base Cladding Using Ambient Temperature 

Automatic or Machine Dry Underwater Laser Beam Welding (ULBW) Temper Bead 

Technique, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–878 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative to QA Program Requirements of IWA–4142, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–880 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative to Procurement Requirements of IWA–4143 for Small Nonstandard Welded Fittings, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–889 .......................... 7 (2017 Edition) ............. Reference Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Rate Curves for Irradiated Austenitic Stainless 

Steel in Light-Water Reactor Environments, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–890 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Materials Exempted From G–2110(b) Requirement, Section XI, Division 1. 

Operation and Maintenance Code 

(addressed in DG–1368, Table 2) 

OMN–1, Revision 2 ..... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Rules for Preservice and Inservice Testing of Active Electric Motor-Operated 

Valve Assemblies in Light-Water Reactor Power Plants. 

OMN–3 ......................... 2020 Edition ................... Requirements for Safety Significance Categorization of Components Using Risk Insights for 

Inservice Testing of LWR Power Plants. 

OMN–4 ......................... 2020 Edition ................... Requirements for Risk Insights for Inservice Testing of Check Valves at LWR Power 

Plants. 

OMN–9 ......................... 2020 Edition ................... Use of a Pump Curve for Testing. 

OMN–12 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Inservice Testing Using Risk Insights for Pneumatically and 

Hydraulically Operated Valve Assemblies in Light-Water Reactor Power Plants (OMCode 1998, Subsection ISTC). 

OMN–18 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternate Testing Requirements for Pumps Tested Quarterly Within ±20% of Design Flow. 

OMN–19 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Upper Limit for the Comprehensive Pump Test. 

OMN–20 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Inservice Test Frequency. 

1. ASME BPV Code, Section III Code 

Cases (DG–1366/RG 1.84) 

Code Case N–71–20 [Supplement 6, 

2015 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Additional Materials for 

Subsection NF, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC 

Supports Fabricated by Welding, 

Section III, Division 1. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case N–71–20 are the same as the 

conditions on N–71–19 that were 

approved by the NRC in Revision 38 of 

RG 1.84. When the ASME revised N–71, 

the Code Case was not modified in a 

way that would make it possible for the 

NRC to remove the conditions. 

Therefore, the conditions would be 

retained in Revision 39 of RG 1.84. 

Code Case N–155–3 [Supplement 5, 

2015 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Fiberglass Reinforced 

Thermosetting Resin Pipe, Section III, 

Division 1. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case N–155–3 are the same as the 

conditions on N–155–2 that were 

approved by the NRC in Revision 38 of 

RG 1.84. When the ASME revised N– 

155–2, the Code Case was not modified 

in a way that would make it possible for 

the NRC to remove the conditions. 

Therefore, the conditions would be 

retained in Revision 39 of RG 1.84. 

Code Case N–755–4 [Supplement 1, 

2017 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Use of Polyethylene (PE) Class 

3 Plastic Pipe, Section III, Division 1. 

This Code Case is applicable only to 

butt fusion joints and the content was 

incorporated into Mandatory Appendix 

XXVI in 2015 Edition of Section III of 

the ASME Code. The relevant 

provisions of Code Case N–755–4 are 

the same as those in Mandatory 

Appendix XXVI. Therefore, the NRC is 

applying the same conditions to Code 

Case N–755–4. The NRC has determined 

that these conditions are necessary to 

ensure structural integrity of the 

polyethylene piping and fusion joints 

when the polyethylene piping is used in 

Class 3 safety-related applications. 

Code Case N–779 [Supplement 9, 2007 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Alternative Rules for Simplified 

Elastic-Plastic Analysis Class 1, Section 

III, Division 1. 

The NRC finds the Code Case 

satisfactory and technically acceptable 

for use only with code editions Summer 

1979 and later. This Code Case, as 

written, is not acceptable for use with 

editions of Section III earlier than the 

Summer 1979 edition, which included 

the term Delta T1 in NB–3600 Equation 

10, because the Code Case is based on 

equations used in the Summer 1979 

edition and later editions of the Code. 

Code Case N–852 [Supplement 0, 2015 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Application of the ASME NPT 

Stamp, Section III, Divisions 1, 2, 3, and 

5. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7827 

The NRC approved this Code Case 

with conditions in a § 50.55a 

rulemaking issued in 2017 (82 FR 

32934, Sept. 18, 2017), and the 

supplement was not modified in a way 

that would make it possible for the NRC 

to remove the conditions. Therefore, the 

NRC is including a condition that this 

Code Case can only be used for the 

service life of a component that had the 

horizontally arranged NPT Code Symbol 

Stamp applied during the time period 

from January 1, 2005, through December 

31, 2015. 

Code Case N–883 [Supplement 5, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Construction of Items Prior to 

the Establishment of a Section III, 

Division 1 Owner, Section III, Division 

1. 

This Code Case allows certificate 

holders to construct all items prior to 

the establishment of an Owner. Code 

Case N–883 was developed to address 

international stakeholders and identify 

the ASME as a global standard 

development organization. The NRC’s 

main concern is that without the 

designation of an Owner, the NRC 

would not be able to provide regulatory 

oversight of the ASME certificate holder 

manufacturing the items, which is not 

consistent with appendix B to 10 CFR 

part 50 and the requirements in 

§ 50.55(a) for a basic component. During 

discussions with the ASME staff on this 

Code Case, it was determined that the 

NRC would condition this Code Case 

based on regulatory oversight, as would 

other regulatory bodies depending on 

each countries’ specific regulations. 

This is evident as this Code Case 

specifies that the ‘‘the items have been 

constructed by [ASME] Certificate 

Holders who are specifically authorized 

by the Regulatory Authority having 

jurisdiction over the Owner’s facility to 

construct items using this Case.’’ The 

proposed condition, ‘‘This Code Case 

may be used for the construction of 

items by a holder of a construction 

permit, operating license, or combined 

license under 10 CFR part 50 or part 

52,’’ provides this specific regulatory 

authorization thereby ensuring the 

appropriate regulatory oversight. 

Code Case N–886 [Supplement 6, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Use of Polyethylene Pipe for 

Class 3, Section III, Division 1. 

This Code Case is applicable for the 

use of polyethylene pipe in Section III, 

Class 3, Division 1 above ground 

applications. This Code Case refers to 

Mandatory Appendix XXVI of Section 

III of the ASME Code. The 2015 Edition 

of Appendix XXVI contains 

requirements for butt fusion joints for 

buried piping. The 2017 Edition of 

Appendix XXVI contains requirements 

for butt fusion and electrofusion joints 

for buried piping. Therefore, all the 

conditions as noted in Section III of the 

2015–2017 Code Edition rule related to 

buried piping Mandatory Appendix 

XXVI apply to this Code Case. The same 

conditions as buried piping also apply 

to above ground application. Two 

additional conditions are needed for 

above ground applications, one on fire 

protection and one on carbon black 

distribution to protect from windows 

and delamination. A condition on fire 

protection is needed because 

polyethylene material is combustible 

and above ground uses are more 

susceptible to fire hazards. In addition, 

a condition requiring homogeneous 

carbon black distributiuon is needed 

because experiments have shown that 

inhomogeneous carbon black 

distribution can lead to windows and 

delamination. 

2. ASME BPV Code, Section XI Code 

Cases (DG–1367/RG 1.147) 

Code Case N–513–5 [Supplement 6, 

2017 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Evaluation Criteria for 

Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in 

Moderate Energy Class 2 or 3 Piping and 

Gate Valves, Section XI, Division 1. 

Code Case N–513–5 contains 

provisions to permit temporary 

acceptance of flaws, in moderate energy 

Class 2 or 3 piping, including elbows, 

pipe bends, reducers, expanders, branch 

tees, and gate valves without performing 

a repair/replacement activity for a 

limited period. The Code Case contains 

provisions regarding the scope, flaw 

characterization, periodic leakage 

monitoring, flaw evaluation, and 

augmented examinations. The NRC 

finds that the provisions of N–513–5 are 

acceptable except for the augmented 

examination provisions in Section 5 of 

the Code Case. 

When a licensee applies N–513–5 to 

disposition a through-wall leak or wall 

thinning in a piping system, Section 5 

of the Code Case requires augmented 

examinations for flaws and significant 

flaws. The augmented examination 

requirements in N–513–5 are the same 

as in Code Case, N–513–3. 

In 2018, the NRC found an instance 

where a licensee misinterpreted the 

provisions in Section 5 of N–513–3 and 

did not perform the required augmented 

examinations to disposition a throughwall leak in a service water system pipe. 

Other licensees have similarly 

misinterpreted the augmented 

examination provisions in Section 5 of 

N–513–3. The NRC found that the issue 

stems from the definition of the terms 

‘‘flaw’’ and ‘‘significant flaw’’ in 

Sections 5(b) and 5(c) of N–513–3, 

respectively. The NRC, therefore, 

proposes two conditions to define 

‘‘flaw’’ and ‘‘significant flaw’’ as those 

terms are used in Section 5 of N–513– 

5. Licensees would be required to apply 

these definitions to Section 5 when 

using the Code Case. 

The first proposed condition defines a 

‘‘flaw’’ as a non-through-wall planar or 

nonplanar flaw with a wall thickness 

less than 87.5 percent of the nominal 

wall thickness of the pipe or the design 

minimum wall thickness. The NRC 

notes that the pipe wall thickness at the 

time of the plant construction may 

deviate from the nominal pipe wall 

thickness slightly as part of 

manufacturing process. The generally 

accepted deviation is 12.5 percent of the 

nominal pipe wall thickness or the 

design minimum wall thickness. 

The second proposed condition 

defines ‘‘significant flaw’’ as any pipe 

location that does not satisfy the 

provisions of Section 3 of N–513–5 or if 

any detected flaw that has a depth 

greater than 75 percent of the pipe wall 

thickness. The NRC staff notes that the 

criterion of the 75 percent wall 

thickness criterion originates from the 

provisions of IWC/IWD–3643 of the 

ASME Code, Section XI, which 

prohibits a flaw that exceeds 75 percent 

of the pipe wall thickness to remain in 

service. Under Section 5 of N–513–5, a 

planar flaw that exceeds 75 percent of 

the pipe wall thickness may remain in 

service; however, the licensee must 

perform an augmented examination. 

Code Case N–516–5 [Supplement 6, 

2015 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Underwater Welding, Section 

XI, Division 1. 

In the rulemaking for the 2009 

Addenda through 2013 Editions of the 

ASME Code (82 FR 32934, Sept. 18, 

2017), the NRC-specified conditions that 

should be applied to Section XI, Article 

IWA–4660 when performing underwater 

welding on irradiated materials. These 

conditions provide guidance on what 

level of neutron irradiation and/or 

helium content would require review 

and approval by the NRC because of the 

impact of neutron fluence on 

weldability. These conditions provide 

separate criteria for three generic classes 

of material: Ferritic material, austenitic 

material other than P-No. 8 (e.g., nickelbased alloys) and austenitic P-No. 8 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7828 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

material (e.g., stainless steel alloys). 

These conditions are currently located 

in § 50.55a(b)(2)(xii)(A) and (B). The 

conditions located in 

§ 50.55a(b)(2)(xii)(A) and (B) are 

identical to the conditions that were 

imposed on Code Case N–516–4 that 

were approved by the NRC in Revision 

19 of RG 1.147. When the ASME revised 

N–516, the Code Case was not modified 

in a way that would make it possible for 

the NRC to remove the conditions. 

Therefore, the conditions will be 

retained in Revision 20 of RG 1.147 by 

stating the provisions of 

§ 50.55a(b)(2)(xii)(A) and (B) must be 

met when applying this Code Case. 

Code Case N–705–1 [Supplement 2, 

2017 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Evaluation Criteria for 

Temporary Acceptance of Degradation 

in Moderate Energy Class 2 or 3 Vessels 

and Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

The proposed condition on Code Case 

N–705–1 is identical to the condition on 

N–705 that was approved by the NRC in 

Revision 19 of RG 1.147. When the 

ASME revised N–705, the Code Case 

was not modified in a way that would 

make it possible for the NRC to remove 

the condition. Therefore, the condition 

would be retained in Revision 20 of RG 

1.147. 

Code Case N–766–3 [Supplement 2, 

2017 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Nickel Alloy Reactor Coolant 

Inlay and Onlay for Mitigation of PWR 

Full Penetration Circumferential Nickel 

Alloy Dissimilar Metal Welds in Class 1 

Items, Section XI, Division 1. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case N–766–3 are identical to the 

conditions on N–766–1 that were 

approved by the NRC in Revision 19 of 

RG 1.147. When the ASME revised N– 

766, the Code Case was not modified in 

a way that would make it possible for 

the NRC to remove the conditions. 

Therefore, the conditions would be 

retained in Revision 20 of RG 1.147. 

Code Case N–831–1 [Supplement 7, 

2017 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu 

of Radiography for Welds in Ferritic or 

Austenitic Pipe, Section XI, Division 1. 

The proposed condition on Code Case 

N–831–1 is identical to the condition on 

N–831 that was approved by the NRC in 

Revision 19 of RG 1.147. When ASME 

revised N–831, the Code Case was not 

modified in a way that would make it 

possible for the NRC to remove the 

condition. Therefore, the condition 

would be retained in Revision 20 of RG 

1.147. 

Code Case N–847 [Supplement 0, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Partial Excavation and 

Deposition of Weld Metal for Mitigation 

of Class 1 Items, Section XI, Division 1. 

ASME Code Case N–847 provides 

guidelines for a repair/mitigation 

process for welds. The process, 

excavation and weld repair (EWR), 

removes susceptible material from the 

outside diameter of the pipe, and 

replaces it with more resistant weld 

material. This technique allows for the 

potential of two mitigation methods, the 

use of more crack resistant material and 

the potential for compressive stresses on 

the inside surface of the repaired/ 

mitigated weld to arrest or prevent 

cracking. Finally, the excavation can be 

done 360-degrees around the weld or 

only for a partial arc of the weld. 

The Code Case would allow for 

application of this process to both BWR 

and PWR designs. However, the EWR 

process, as defined in this code case, 

has certain challenges addressing the 

cracking mechanisms in these operating 

enviornments and materials. In addition 

the regulatory requirements or 

guidelines related to the Code Case vary 

depending on the design of the reactor. 

For PWR designs, the inservice 

inspection rules are provided by 

§ 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(F), which mandates the 

implementation of a version of ASME 

Code Case N–770. For BWR designs, the 

inservice inspection guidelines are 

provided by Generic Letter 88–01, ‘‘NRC 

Position on Intergranular Stress 

Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) in BWR 

Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping’’ or 

BWRVIP–75–A, ‘‘BWR Vessel and 

Internals Project Technical Basis for 

Revisions to Generic Letter 88–01 

Inspection Schedules.’’ Therefore, the 

NRC is proposing six conditions to 

ensure the inservice inspection 

frequency guidelines of the code case 

are inline with the previous 

requirements and guidance, which are 

based on the effectiveness of the overall 

design of the repair/mitigation to 

address the various cracking 

mechanisms of these operating reactor 

designs. 

The first proposed condition is a 

continuation of the condition of 

§ 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(F)(16) which requires 

that a partial arc EWR, as described in 

Inspection Item O of ASME Code Case 

N–770–5, cannot be used without NRC 

review and approval for PWR designs. 

The NRC notes that the issues addressed 

in the final rule incorporating by 

reference the 2015 and 2017 Editions of 

the ASME BPV Code and the 2015 and 

2017 Editions of the ASME OM Code 

remain applicable, and futher apply to 

BWR design application of a partial arc 

EWR. These concerns are for the 

effectiveness of the repair through a 

weld residual stress calculation and 

flaw growth analysis to confirm design 

of the mitigation for the required 

inspection interval, non-destructive 

examination uncertainty analysis of the 

as-found flaw remaining in the reactor 

coolant pressure boundary, and the 

potential for further crack initiation or 

growth. Therefore, the NRC requires, 

through the first condition, that 

approval of the use of this Code Case is 

only for the application of the 360-degee 

EWR. 

The second proposed condition is 

related to Figure 1A and Figure 1B of 

the Code Case. The NRC has experience 

with relief request submittals, where the 

details associated with the configuration 

of the prep area, where the defect is 

being removed, have shown sharp 

bottom edges and steep walls. This 

geometry can result in welding issues, 

which could result in unfused material, 

leading to stress risers, which may 

promote cracking. Therefore, the NRC 

requires, through the second condition, 

that the intersection points at the 

interface between EWR metal and 

existing base metal must be rounded to 

minimize stress concentration. 

The third proposed condition is 

related to Section 2(d)(2) of the Code 

Case which discusses the flaw 

evaluations required for the design 

considerations of the EWR. In recent 

testing conducted for the NRC 

measurable stress corrosion cracking 

(SCC) growth was detected past the 

interface between the SCC-susceptible 

and less susceptible material. It was 

demonstrated that the crack can branch 

and propagate in a direction normal to 

the original direction along a SCCsusceptible path. In the Alloy 52M 

deposited onto Alloy 182 specimens 

tested, this occurred in the diluted 

region of the Alloy 52M material as well 

as the weld metal. Therefore, the NRC 

requires, through the third condition, 

that flaw analysis include the potential 

for crack growth through the dilution 

zone. As NRC-approved crack growth 

rates are not available for all material 

types (e.g., Alloy 690 weld material), the 

alternative requirements for 

development of crack growth rates 

should be consistent with ASME 

Section XI Appendix C, ‘‘Flaw Growth 

Rate Due to Stress Corrosion Cracking,’’ 

C–3220(a). 

The fourth proposed condition is 

related to Section 2 of the Code Case. 

The NRC is requiring the use of 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7829 

NUREG–2228, ‘‘Weld Residual Stress 

Finite Element Analysis Validation: Part 

II—Proposed Validation Procedure,’’ 

because it provides a proven method for 

validating the weld residual stress 

analysis methodology. Because the NRC 

requires the use of NUREG–2228 within 

this condition on the requirements in 

the Code Case, the NRC is incorporating 

by reference NUREG–2228 into 

§ 50.55a(a)(3)(iv). 

The fifth condition is related to the 

longer term volumetric inspection 

frequencies of Table 1, including notes 

(1), (3), and (4). These notes provide the 

BWR design inspection frequency of 

various EWR types based on Generic 

Letter 88–01 (1988) as supplemented by 

Generic Letter 88–01, Supplement 1 

(1992), ‘‘NRC Position on Intergranular 

Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) in 

BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping’’ 

or BWRVIP–75–A, ‘‘BWR Vessel and 

Internals Project Technical Basis for 

Revisions to Generic Letter 88–01 

Inspection Schedules.’’ The NRC has 

concluded that the inspection 

requirements for EWRs for BWRs need 

to be augmented. 

The first volumetric examination 

following application of BWR EWR–2A, 

EWR–1B, and EWR–2B welds is 

performed to verify effectiveness of the 

repair/mitigation before the new weld 

can be placed in a longer term 

volumetric inspection frequency. The 

Code Case allows licensees the option of 

performing this examination during the 

first or second refueling outage after 

installation. However, based on the 

lower operating temperatures of a BWR 

(approximately 546 degree F to 558 

degree F), and hence the potential slow 

crack growth rate of the remaining flaw 

left in service, the NRC has concluded 

that the examination should occur 

during the second refueling outage after 

the EWR application to provide 

adequate time for any potential 

measurable flaw growth to occur or in 

the case of an EWR–2A, for crack 

initiation and growth to occur. 

The long term volumetric inspections 

for BWRs require modification because: 

(a) For EWR–1A EWRs, the augmented 

inspection requirements are consistent 

with the conditions of the inspection 

frequencies of Code Case N–770–5. 

These inspection frequency 

requirements were previously 

developed by the NRC based on the 

capabilities of the EWR process to 

address stress corrosion cracking while 

providing significant credit for the use 

of hydrogen water chemistry/noble 

metal chemical addition controls; and 

(b) for EWR–1B EWRs, due to the design 

which would allow a crack to be left in 

service, should not be allowed to go 

uninspected for the remainder of plant 

life. Therefore, the NRC requires the 

long term volumetric inspection of these 

welds at each 10-year inservice 

inspection interval. The NRC notes that 

this condition is consistent with the 

NRC condition established in § 50.55a 

for Inspection Item N–1 EWRs (EWR 

that meets stress criteria; however, a 

crack is present). 

The sixth condition is related to Table 

1, Note (1), and the option to use an 

unspecified alternative to determine 

examination frequencies and scope 

expansion criteria. Note (1) specifies the 

use of NRC Generic Letter 88–01 and 

includes BWRVIP–75–A as an example 

of an alternative. The NRC has 

concluded that NRC Generic Letter 88– 

01, (1988) as supplemented by Generic 

Letter 88–01, Supplement 1 (1992), or 

BWRVIP–75–A, represent sufficient 

requirements, subject to the fifth 

condition above, to determine 

examination frequencies and scope 

expansion criteria. However, Note (1) 

would allow the use of other, unknown 

alternatives and does not provide 

criteria to ensure alternatives are 

adequate for this purpose. Therefore, to 

ensure that licensees use an adequate 

standard to determine examination 

frequencies and scope expansion 

criteria, the sixth condition requires that 

licensees must not use an alternative 

other than those specified in Note (1). 

Code Case N–864 [Supplement 2, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Reactor Vessel Threads in 

Flange Examinations, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

Code Case N–864 proposes to 

eliminate the required ASME Code, 

Section XI examination for the reactor 

vessel threads-in-flange for all inservice 

inspection intervals. The NRC has 

previously granted alternatives under 

§ 50.55a(z) that eliminate the reactor 

pressure vessel threads-in-flange 

examinations (ASME Section XI, 

Examination Category B–G–1, Item No. 

B6.40) for up to two inservice 

inspection intervals through the NRC’s 

alternative request process. For 

alternatives that requested elimination 

of the examination for a second 

consecutive ten-year inservice 

inspection interval, the NRC has been 

requesting additional information on 

activities performed to ensure that the 

condition of the reactor pressure vessel 

threads-in-flange receives some level of 

monitoring. These activities typically 

have been care and maintenance of the 

reactor vessel threads-in-flange (and 

studs) whenever the closure head is 

removed. The NRC has limited approval 

of such requests to two subsequent 

inservice inspection intervals because 

the NRC has determined that complete 

elimination of the examinations does 

not provide adequate protection against 

long-term degradation of the threads-inflange. The NRC is proposing conditions 

on the use of Code Case N–864 that are 

consistent with the limits the NRC has 

placed on similar alternatives requests. 

The first proposed condition in Code 

Case N–864 requires that the reactor 

pressure vessel threads-in-flange 

examinations (ASME Section XI, 

Examination Category B–G–1, Item No. 

B6.40) must be performed in at least 

every third 10-year ISI interval. The first 

proposed condition also limits the 

application of Code Case N–864 at 

facilities that have been authorized 

under 10 CFR 50.55a(z) to use 

alternatives that eliminate reactor 

pressure vessel threads-in-flange 

examinations to ensure that the required 

examination is performed at least every 

third 10-year inservice inspection 

interval. 

The second proposed condition in 

Code Case N–864 ensures that sufficient 

monitoring and maintenance activities 

are performed when the Code Case is 

applied. 

Code Case N–869 [Supplement 6, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Evaluation Criteria for 

Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in 

Class 2 or 3 Piping, Section XI, Division 

1. 

Code Case N–869 contains provisions 

for temporary acceptance of flaws, 

including through-wall flaws in Class 2 

or 3 piping including elbows, pipe 

bends, reducers, and branch tees, whose 

maximum operating pressure is greater 

than 275 psig, and does not exceed 600 

psig, without performing a repair/ 

replacement activity. The Code Case 

contains provisions regarding the scope, 

flaw characterization, periodic leakage 

monitoring, flaw evaluation, and 

augmented examinations. The NRC 

finds that the Code Case provides 

reasonable assurance that structural 

integrity of degraded piping will be 

maintained until the next scheduled 

refueling outage. However, the NRC 

finds that the augmented examination 

provisions in Section 5 of the Code Case 

are inadequate and need additional 

requirements. 

When a licensee applies N–869 to 

disposition a through-wall leak or wall 

thinning in a piping system, Section 5 

of the Code Case requires augmented 

examinations for flaws and significant 

flaws. The augmented examination 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7830 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

requirements in N–869 are the same as 

in Code Case N–513–3. 

In 2018, the NRC found an instance 

where a licensee misinterpreted the 

provisions in Section 5 of N–513–3 and 

did not perform the required augmented 

examinations to disposition a throughwall leak in a service water system pipe. 

Other licensees have similarly 

misinterpreted the augmented 

examination provisions in Section 5 of 

N–513–3. The NRC found that the issue 

stems from the definition of the terms 

‘‘flaw’’ and ‘‘significant flaw’’ in 

Sections 5(b) and 5(c) of N–513–3, 

respectively. The NRC, therefore, 

proposes two conditions to define 

‘‘flaw’’ and ‘‘significant flaw’’ as those 

terms are used in Section 5 of N–869. 

Licensees would be required to apply 

these definitions to Section 5 when 

using the Code Case. 

The first proposed condition defines a 

‘‘flaw’’ as a non-through-wall planar or 

nonplanar flaw with a wall thickness 

less than 87.5 percent of the nominal 

wall thickness of the pipe or the design 

minimum wall thickness. The NRC 

notes that the pipe wall thickness at the 

time of the plant construction may 

deviate from the nominal pipe wall 

thickness slightly as part of 

manufacturing process. The generally 

accepted deviation is 12.5 percent of the 

nominal pipe wall thickness or the 

design minimum wall thickness. 

The second proposed condition 

defines ‘‘significant flaw’’ as any pipe 

location that does not satisfy the 

provisions of Section 3 of N–869 or if 

any detected flaw that has a depth 

greater than 75 percent of the pipe wall 

thickness. The NRC staff notes that the 

criterion of the 75 percent wall 

thickness criterion originates from the 

provisions of IWC/IWD–3643 of the 

ASME Code, Section XI, which prohibit 

a flaw that exceeds 75 percent of the 

pipe wall thickness to remain in service. 

Under Section 5 of N–869, a planar flaw 

that exceeds 75 percent of the pipe wall 

thickness may remain in service; 

however, the licensee needs to perform 

an augmented examination. 

Code Case N–876 [Supplement 2, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Austenitic Stainless Steel 

Cladding and Nickel Base Cladding 

Using Ambient Temperature Automatic 

or Machine Dry Underwater Laser Beam 

Welding (ULBW) Temper Bead 

Technique, Section XI, Division 1. 

Some irradiated stainless steel reactor 

vessel internal components are 

susceptible to experiencing irradiation 

assisted stress corrosion cracking. Code 

Case N–876 provides guidelines for 

repair welding the irradiated stainless 

steel components inside the reactor 

vessel. Code Case N–876 provides an 

alternative to the cladding temper bead 

repair rules of Section XI, IWA–4400, 

which requires preheat and postweld 

heat treatment. This alternative 

establishes new rules governing ambient 

temperature temper bead cladding 

repairs using the ULBW process. 

The NRC is proposing two conditions 

on this Code Case. The first proposed 

condition that must be applied when 

performing ULBW on irradiated 

materials provides guidance on what 

level of neutron irradiation and/or 

helium content would require review 

and approval by the NRC because of the 

impact of neutron fluence on 

weldability. The second proposed 

condition limits the depth of the 

cladding repair due to concerns with the 

fracture toughness of the base metal. 

The technical basis for imposing 

conditions on the welding of irradiated 

materials are that neutrons can generate 

helium atoms within the metal lattice 

through transmutation of various 

isotopes of boron and/or nickel. At high 

temperatures, such as occurs during 

welding, these helium atoms rapidly 

diffuse though the metal lattice, 

coalescing and forming helium bubbles 

at the grain boundaries. In sufficient 

concentration, these helium bubbles can 

cause grain boundary cracking that 

occurs in the fusion zones and heat 

affected zones during the heat-up/ 

cooldown cycle. 

The first proposed condition applies 

conditions already applicable to Code 

Case N–516–5 ‘‘Underwater Welding 

Section XI, Division 1,’’ that the 

provisions of § 50.55a(b)(2)(xii)(A) and 

(B) must be met. This regulation 

provides limits on specific levels of 

neutron irradiation and/or helium 

content, above which welding is 

prohibited without prior NRC review 

and approval. The NRC is proposing to 

apply the same condition to uses of 

Code Case N–876. 

The second proposed condition is 

necessary because the Code Case does 

not require impact testing of the base 

metal heat affected zone (HAZ) to verify 

adequate fracture toughness. The Code 

Case allows the depth of the repair 

cavity into the ferritic base metal to be 

up to 1⁄4′′. This would allow welding 

directly to the base metal, thus it will 

affect the fracture toughness of the base 

metal in the HAZ. Therefore, the NRC 

is proposing a condition restricting the 

use of the Code Case to repairs where at 

least 1⁄8′′ of cladding remains. The basis 

for the 1⁄8′′ limit is that this amount of 

austenitic material between the ferritic 

base metal and the first weld layer has 

generally been considered to sufficiently 

limit the heat input to the base metal 

such that deleterious effects on the 

fracture toughness will not occur; 

therefore, impact testing of the base 

metal is not necessary. The NRC notes 

that Code Case N–803, which is 

approved without conditions, allows 

repair of ferritic base material using 

nonferritic weld filler material based on 

welding procedure qualifications 

performed using tensile tests, side 

bends, and impact tests, and could be 

used to perform a cladding repair in 

which excavation into the base metal is 

required. 

Code Case N–878 [Supplement 1, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Alternative to QA Program 

Requirements of IWA–4142, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

Code Case N–878 provides 

alternatives to the quality assurance 

requirements in IWA–4142 for 

procurement of Class 1, 2, or 3 nonwelded fittings. This Code Case 

addresses the testing and certification of 

material used in the manufacture of 

non-welded fittings, but does not 

address how the licensee must ensure 

that the procured non-welded fittings 

meet the design and testing 

requirements of the ASME Code, 

Section III, NB/NC/ND–3671.7 for Class 

1, 2, or 3 applications. Verification that 

the Section III requirements for the 

design and testing of these non-welded 

fittings have been met prior to use is 

essential in ensuring the structural 

integrity of these Class 1, 2 and 3 

systems is maintained. Therefore, the 

NRC is proposing conditions for the 

licensee to verify the design and testing 

activities associated with qualification 

of non-welded fittings required by 

Section III, NB/NC/ND–3671.7 that are 

performed by the fabricator. 

Code Case N–880 [Supplement 2, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Alternative to Procurement 

Requirements of IWA–4143 for Small 

Nonstandard Welded Fittings, Section 

XI, Division 1. 

Code Case N–880 provides 

alternatives to the material procurement 

requirements of IWA–4142 and IWA– 

4143 for small nonstandard welded 

fittings. This Code Case does not 

address how the licensee must ensure 

the procured welded fittings meet the 

design and testing requirements of the 

ASME Code, Section III, NB/NC/ND– 

3671.7 for Class 1, 2, or 3 applications. 

Verification that the Section III 

requirements for the design and testing 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7831 

of these welded fittings have been met 

prior to use is essential in ensuring the 

structural integrity of these Class 1, 2 

and 3 systems is maintained. Therefore, 

the NRC is proposing conditions 

requiring the licensee to verify the 

design and testing activities associated 

with qualification of welded fittings 

required by Section III, NB/NC/ND– 

3671.7 that are performed by the 

fabricator. 

Code Case N–889 [Supplement 7, 2017 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Reference Stress Corrosion 

Crack Growth Rate Curves for Irradiated 

Austenitic Stainless Steel in Light-Water 

Reactor Environments, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

Code Case N–889 provides a new 

crack growth rate (CGR) law for 

irradiation-assisted stress corrosion 

cracking. The Code Case is applicable to 

wrought austenitic stainless steels and 

associated weld metals, as well as cast 

austenitic stainless steels. The proposed 

CGR law requires the user to first 

calculate irradiated yield stress from the 

dose to the material. There are two yield 

stress models: One for Molybdenum 

bearing stainless steels and one for 

stainless steels without Molybdenum. 

Once irradiated yield stress has been 

determined, the user calculates the CGR 

as a function of applied crack driving 

force and temperature. 

The staff identified three concerns 

with the technical basis of this Code 

Case. The first concern relates to the 

limited CGR data at dose levels greater 

than 20 displacements per atom (dpa). 

The proposed CGR law indicates that 

the irradiated yield stress (and, 

consequently, the CGR) increases with 

fluence up to a dose of 20 dpa, at which 

point the irradiated yield’s stress ceases 

to increase appreciably with further 

dose accumulation. While the data at 

dose levels greater than 20 dpa does 

show a plateau behavior in the CGR, the 

staff’s analyses of that data suggests that 

areas of high CGR were averaged over 

the industry calculation of CGR, which 

increases the uncertainty in the high 

dose CGRs. Therefore, due to the limited 

data and the associated high uncertainty 

at high fluence, the staff’s confidence in 

CGRs at dose levels greater than 20 dpa 

is low. 

The second concern is the effects of 

uncertainty in the irradiated yield 

strength value for an individual 

material-heat. This topic is discussed in 

Section 4.7 of the technical basis report 

for Code Case N–889. The NRC also 

conducted separate analyses. While the 

results of the NRC’s findings are 

generally consistent with the results in 

Section 4.7, the interpretation of their 

significance is not consistent. For 

materials with yield strengths greater 

than 600 MPa (i.e., more highlyirradiated materials), the expected CGR 

for a material with a yield strength in 

the 95th percentile is less than two 

times the CGR predicted by the Code 

Case, which is not a significant 

difference. However, for materials with 

yield strength values less than 250 MPa 

(i.e., unirradiated or minimally 

irradiated materials), the expected CGR 

for a material in the 95th percentile can 

be more than five times greater than the 

CGR predicted by the Code Case. Hence, 

the NRC’s concern is that the CGRs for 

individual low yield strength materials, 

or materials with low fluence, could be 

significantly underpredicted by the 

Code Case. 

The final concern is related to the 

data used in the development of the 

irradiated yield stress model. The 

methodology for addressing cold work 

in this model was developed in MRP– 

135, Revision 1, while the model itself 

was developed in MRP–211, Revision 0. 

The database underlying the model 

included hundreds of yield strength 

measurements on initially annealed and 

cold-worked Types 304, 316, and 347/ 

348 stainless steel materials. However, 

most of the data were for annealed Type 

304 and cold-worked Type 316 stainless 

steels. Revision 1 of MRP–211 contained 

additional yield strength data, including 

significantly more data for cold-worked 

Types 304 and 347 stainless steel. The 

authors of the Code Case, as 

documented in Section 4.5 of the 

Additional Basis Report dated February 

5, 2018, evaluated the Code Case yield 

stress model with some of this 

additional data and found agreement 

between the model and the additional 

data. However, the Code Case authors 

excluded new data for cold-worked 

Type 304 and 347 stainless steel 

materials. Therefore, the technical basis 

document for Code Case N–889 does not 

directly address whether cold-worked 

Type 304 and 347 (non-Molybdenum 

bearing) materials are adequately 

predicted by the irradiated yield 

strength model in the Code Case. 

Therefore, the NRC is proposing three 

conditions on this Code Case. 

The first proposed condition states 

that this Code Case may not be applied 

for neutron exposures greater than 20 

dpa. This condition addresses the NRC 

concern that there is sparse data with 

high uncertainty beyond 20 dpa. Given 

that the predicted CGR saturates at 

higher fluence, this condition prevents 

potential underprediction of the CGR in 

this fluence regime. 

The second proposed condition states 

that at dose levels below 0.75 dpa, the 

user must use the higher of the Code 

Case N–889 or the Section XI, 

Nonmandatory Appendix C, C–8520 

CGR predictions. This condition 

addresses the NRC concern related to 

possible underprediction of CGR in 

Code Case N–889 for materials with 

calculated irradiated yield strength less 

than 250 MPa. 

The final proposed condition states 

that the irradiated yield stress model for 

cold-worked Molybdenum bearing 

materials must be used for cold-worked 

non-Molybdenum bearing stainless 

steels (including Type 204 and 247 

stainless steels). This condition 

addresses the NRC concern that data for 

cold-worked non-Molybdenum bearing 

steels were not appropriately considered 

during development of Code Case N– 

889. The NRC performed its own 

evaluation of cold-worked Type 304 and 

347 stainless steels in the MRP–211 

database and found that the yield 

strength was better predicted by the 

Code Case’s Molybdenum bearing 

model than with the Code Case’s nonMolybdenum bearing model. 

Code Case N–890 [Supplement 0, 2019 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Materials Exempted From G– 

2110(b) Requirements, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

Code Case N–890 provides an 

alternative to Section XI, G–2110(b) 

which removes the requirement of, 

‘‘obtaining fracture toughness data for at 

least three heats,’’ for using the static 

fracture toughness curve (KIc) curve for 

specific materials with a minimum 

specified yield strength at room 

temperature between 50 kilopound per 

square inch (ksi) and 90 ksi. Code Case 

N–890 would allow the toughness of 

four ferritic steels (SA–508 Grade 2 

Class 2, SA–508 Grade 3 Class 2, SA– 

533 Type A Class 2 and SA–533 Type 

B Class 2) with specified minimum 

yield strength greater than 50 ksi to be 

characterized by Figure G–2110–1 (i.e., 

the Section XI KIc curve). 

The NRC identified one technical 

concern when reviewing the technical 

basis of this Code Case. The technical 

basis provided appropriate data to 

justify use of the KIc curve for several 

materials listed in the Code Case. 

However, for SA–533 Type B, Class 2 

materials, the NRC observed that in the 

technical basis document, there is no 

fracture toughness data associated with 

the weld and heat affected zone to 

support exclusion of the fracture 

toughness testing requirements for these 

materials. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7832 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

As such, the proposed NRC condition 

requires the user to comply with the 

provisions of Section III, NB–2300 and 

Section III, G–2110(b) to demonstrate 

the applicability of the ASME KIc curve 

to SA–533 Type B, Class 2 material. 

These provisions require the user to 

generate the necessary toughness data to 

demonstrate that the ASME KIc curve is 

a conservative representation of the 

actual material toughness. 

3. ASME Operation and Maintenance 

Code Cases (DG–1368/RG 1.192) 

Code Case OMN–1, Revision 2 [2020 

Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Alternative Rules for Preservice 

and Inservice Testing of Active Electric 

Motor-Operated Valve Assemblies in 

Light-Water Reactor Power Plants. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–1, Revision 2 [2020 Edition] 

are identical to the conditions on OMN– 

1, Revision 2 [2017 Edition] that were 

approved by the NRC in Revision 3 of 

RG 1.192. The OMN–1, Revision 2 was 

reaffirmed by the ASME in the 2020 

Edition with no change to the Code 

Case. Therefore, the conditions would 

be retained in Revision 4 of RG 1.192. 

Code Case OMN–3 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Requirements for Safety 

Significance Categorization of 

Components Using Risk Insights for 

Inservice Testing of LWR Power Plants. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–3 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–3 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–3 was reaffirmed by the ASME in 

the 2020 Edition with no change to the 

Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–4 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Requirements for Risk Insights 

for Inservice Testing of Check Valves at 

LWR Power Plants. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–4 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–4 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–4 was reaffirmed by the ASME in 

the 2020 Edition with no change to the 

Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–9 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Use of a Pump Curve for 

Testing. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–9 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–9 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–9 was reaffirmed by the ASME in 

the 2020 Edition with no change to the 

Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–12 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Alternative Requirements for 

Inservice Testing Using Risk Insights for 

Pneumatically and Hydraulically 

Operated Valve Assemblies in LightWater Reactor Power Plants (OM-Code 

1998, Subsection ISTC). 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–12 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–12 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–12 was reaffirmed by the ASME 

in the 2020 Edition with no change to 

the Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–18 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Alternate Testing Requirements 

for Pumps Tested Quarterly Within 

±20% of Design Flow. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–18 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–18 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–18 was reaffirmed by the ASME 

in the 2020 Edition with no change to 

the Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–19 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Alternative Upper Limit for the 

Comprehensive Pump Test. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–19 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–19 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–19 was reaffirmed by the ASME 

in the 2020 Edition with no change to 

the Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

Code Case OMN–20 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Inservice Test Frequency. 

The proposed conditions on Code 

Case OMN–20 [2020 Edition] are 

identical to the conditions on OMN–20 

[2017 Edition] that were approved by 

the NRC in Revision 3 of RG 1.192. The 

OMN–20 was reaffirmed by the ASME 

in the 2020 Edition with no change to 

the Code Case. Therefore, the conditions 

would be retained in Revision 4 of RG 

1.192. 

C. ASME Code Cases Not Approved for 

Use (DG–1369/RG 1.193) 

The ASME Code Cases that are 

currently issued by the ASME but not 

approved for generic use by the NRC are 

listed in RG 1.193, ‘‘ASME Code Cases 

not Approved for Use.’’ In addition to 

the ASME Code Cases that the NRC has 

found to be technically or 

programmatically unacceptable, RG 

1.193 includes Code Cases on reactor 

designs for high-temperature gas-cooled 

reactors and liquid metal reactors, 

reactor designs not currently licensed by 

the NRC, and certain requirements in 

Section III, Division 2, for submerged 

spent fuel waste casks, that are not 

endorsed by the NRC. Regulatory Guide 

1.193 complements RGs 1.84, 1.147, and 

1.192. It should be noted that the NRC 

is not proposing to adopt any of the 

Code Cases listed in RG 1.193. 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis 

The following paragraphs in § 50.55a 

would be revised as follows: 

Paragraph (a)(3) Introductory Text 

This proposed rule would add a 

reference to NUREG–2228 that is 

acceptable as specified in the conditions 

when implementing Code Cases listed 

in certain NRC regulatory guides. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(i) 

This proposed rule would revise the 

reference to ‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 

1.84, Revision 38,’’ by removing 

‘‘Revision 38’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘Revision 39’’ and change the month 

and year for the document’s revision 

date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(ii) 

This proposed rule would revise the 

reference to ‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 

1.147, Revision 19’’ by removing 

‘‘Revision 19’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘Revision 20’’ and change the month 

and year for the document’s revision 

date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) 

This proposed rule would revise the 

reference to ‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 

1.192, Revision 3’’ by removing 

‘‘Revision 3’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘Revision 4’’ and change the month and 

year for the document’s revision date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(iv) 

This proposed rule would add new 

paragraph (a)(3)(iv) to reference 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7833 

NUREG–2228, ‘‘Weld Residual Stress 

Finite Element Analysis Validation: Part 

II—Proposed Validation Procedure,’’ 

dated July 2020, which is referenced in 

RG 1.147, Revision 20. 

Paragraph (b)(3)(iv), Table II 

This proposed rule would capitalize 

the word ‘‘(Years)’’ in two of the three 

column headings. 

V. Regulatory Flexibility Certification 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the 

Commission certifies that this rule, if 

adopted, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This proposed 

rule affects only the licensing and 

operation of nuclear power plants. The 

companies that own these plants do not 

fall within the scope of the definition of 

‘‘small entities’’ set forth in the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size 

standards established by the NRC (10 

CFR 2.810). 

VI. Regulatory Analysis 

The NRC has prepared a draft 

regulatory analysis on this proposed 

regulation. The analysis examines the 

costs and benefits of the alternatives 

considered by the NRC. The NRC 

requests public comment on the draft 

regulatory analysis. The regulatory 

analysis is available as indicated in the 

‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section of 

this document. Comments on the draft 

analysis may be submitted to the NRC 

as indicated under the ADDRESSES

section of this document. 

VII. Backfitting and Issue Finality 

The provisions in this proposed rule 

would allow licensees and applicants to 

voluntarily apply NRC-approved Code 

Cases, sometimes with NRC-specified 

conditions. The approved Code Cases 

are listed in three RGs that are proposed 

to be incorporated by reference into 

§ 50.55a. An applicant’s or a licensee’s 

voluntary application of an approved 

Code Case does not constitute 

backfitting, because there is no 

imposition of a new requirement or new 

position. 

Similarly, voluntary application of an 

approved Code Case by a 10 CFR part 

52 applicant or licensee does not 

represent NRC imposition of a 

requirement or action, and therefore is 

not inconsistent with any issue finality 

provision in 10 CFR part 52. For these 

reasons, the NRC finds that this 

proposed rule does not involve any 

provisions requiring the preparation of 

a backfit analysis or documentation 

demonstrating that one or more of the 

issue finality criteria in 10 CFR part 52 

are met. 

VIII. Plain Writing 

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. 

L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to 

write documents in a clear, concise, and 

well-organized manner. The NRC has 

written this document to be consistent 

with the Plain Writing Act as well as the 

Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing,’’ 

published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). 

The NRC requests comment on this 

document with respect to the clarity and 

effectiveness of the language used. 

IX. Environmental Assessment and 

Proposed Finding of No Significant 

Environmental Impact 

The Commission has determined 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the 

Commission’s regulations in subpart A 

of 10 CFR part 51, that this rule, if 

adopted, would not be a major Federal 

action significantly affecting the quality 

of the human environment; therefore, an 

environmental impact statement is not 

required. 

The determination of this 

environmental assessment is that there 

will be no significant effect on the 

quality of the human environment from 

this action. Interested parties should 

note, however, that comments on any 

aspect of this environmental assessment 

may be submitted to the NRC as 

indicated under the ADDRESSES section 

of this document. 

As voluntary alternatives to the ASME 

Code, NRC-approved Code Cases 

provide an equivalent level of safety. 

Therefore, the probability or 

consequences of accidents is not 

changed. There are also no significant, 

non-radiological impacts associated 

with this action because no changes 

would be made affecting nonradiological plant effluents and because 

no changes would be made in activities 

that would adversely affect the 

environment. The determination of this 

environmental assessment is that there 

will be no significant offsite impact to 

the public from this action. 

X. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement 

This proposed rule contains new or 

amended collections of information 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This 

proposed rule has been submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for approval of the information 

collections. 

Type of submission, new or revision: 

Revision. 

The title of the information collection: 

Domestic Licensing of Production and 

Utilization Facilities: Updates to 

Incorporation by Reference and 

Regulatory Guides. 

The form number if applicable: Not 

applicable. 

How often the collection is required: 

On occasion. 

Who will be required or asked to 

report: Operating power reactor 

licensees and applicants for power 

reactors under construction. 

An estimate of the number of annual 

responses: ¥28 (reduction). 

The estimated number of annual 

respondents: ¥28 (reduction). 

An estimate of the total number of 

hours needed annually to complete the 

requirement or request: ¥6,720 hours 

(reduction of reporting and 

recordkeeping hours). 

Abstract: This proposed rule is the 

latest in a series of rulemakings that 

incorporate by reference the latest 

versions of several RGs identifying new 

and revised unconditionally or 

conditionally acceptable ASME Code 

Cases that are approved for use. The 

incorporation by reference of these Code 

Cases will reduce the number of 

alternative requests submitted by 

licensees under § 50.55a(z) by an 

estimated 28 requests annually. 

The NRC is seeking public comment 

on the potential impact of the 

information collections contained in 

this proposed rule and on the following 

issues: 

1. Is the proposed information 

collection necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

NRC, including whether the information 

will have practical utility? 

2. Is the estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection 

accurate? 

3. Is there a way to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected? 

4. How can the burden of the 

proposed information collection on 

respondents be minimized, including 

the use of automated collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology? 

A copy of the OMB clearance package 

and proposed rule is available in 

ADAMS under Accession No. 

ML20132A240 or can obtained free of 

charge by contacting the NRC’s Public 

Document reference staff at 1–800–397– 

4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to 

pdr.resources@nrc.gov. You may obtain 

information and comment submissions 

related to the OMB clearance package by 

searching on https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

NRC–2017–0025. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7834 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

You may submit comments on any 

aspect of these proposed information 

collections, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden and on the four 

issues, by the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2017–0025. 

• Mail comments to: FOIA, Library, 

and Information Collections Branch, 

Office of the Chief Information Officer, 

Mail Stop: T–6 A10M, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001 or to the OMB reviewer 

at: OMB Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs (3150–0011), Attn: 

Desk Officer for the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, 725 17th Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20503; email: oira_

submission@omb.eop.gov. 

Submit comments on this collection 

of information by March 4, 2021. 

Comments received after this date will 

be considered if it is practical to do so, 

but the NRC staff is able to ensure 

consideration only for comments 

received on or before this date. 

Public Protection Notification 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless the 

document requesting or requiring the 

collection displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act of 1995, Public 

Law 104–113, requires that Federal 

agencies use technical standards that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies unless 

using such a standard is inconsistent 

with applicable law or is otherwise 

impractical. In this proposed rule, the 

NRC is continuing to use the ASME BPV 

and OM Code Cases, which are ASMEapproved voluntary alternatives to 

compliance with various provisions of 

the ASME BPV and OM Codes. The 

NRC’s approval of the ASME Code 

Cases is accomplished by amending the 

NRC’s regulations to incorporate by 

reference the latest revisions of the 

following, which are the subject of this 

rulemaking, into § 50.55a: RG 1.84, 

Revision 39; RG 1.147, Revision 20; RG 

1.192, Revision 4; and NUREG–2228. 

The RGs list the ASME Code Cases that 

the NRC has approved for use. The 

ASME Code Cases are national 

consensus standards as defined in the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 and OMB 

Circular A–119. The ASME Code Cases 

constitute voluntary consensus 

standards, in which all interested 

parties (including the NRC and 

licensees of nuclear power plants) 

participate. The NRC invites comment 

on the applicability and use of other 

standards. 

XII. Incorporation by Reference— 

Reasonable Availability to Interested 

Parties 

The NRC proposes to incorporate by 

reference three NRC RGs that list new 

and revised the ASME Code Cases that 

the NRC has approved as voluntary 

alternatives to certain provisions of 

NRC-required Editions and Addenda of 

the ASME BPV Code and the ASME OM 

Code. The draft regulatory guides, DG– 

1366, DG–1367, and DG–1368, will 

correspond to final RG 1.84, Revision 

39; RG 1.147, Revision 20; and RG 

1.192, Revision 4, respectively. The 

NRC also proposes to incorporate by 

reference NUREG–2228, which is 

referenced in DG–1367 (RG 1.147, 

Revision 20). As described in this 

document, this report pertains to a 

proposed condition on Code Case N– 

847. 

The NRC is required by law to obtain 

approval for incorporation by reference 

from the Office of the Federal Register 

(OFR). The OFR’s requirements for 

incorporation by reference are set forth 

in 1 CFR part 51. On November 7, 2014, 

the OFR adopted changes to its 

regulations governing incorporation by 

reference (79 FR 66267). The OFR 

regulations require an agency to include 

in a proposed rule a discussion of the 

ways that the materials the agency 

proposes to incorporate by reference are 

reasonably available to interested 

parties or how it worked to make those 

materials reasonably available to 

interested parties. The discussion in this 

section complies with the requirement 

for proposed rules as set forth in 1 CFR 

51.5(a)(1). 

The NRC considers ‘‘interested 

parties’’ to include all potential NRC 

stakeholders, not only the individuals 

and entities regulated or otherwise 

subject to the NRC’s regulatory 

oversight. These NRC stakeholders are 

not a homogenous group, so the 

considerations for determining 

‘‘reasonable availability’’ vary by class 

of interested parties. The NRC identified 

six classes of interested parties with 

regard to the material to be incorporated 

by reference in an NRC rule: 

• Individuals and small entities 

regulated or otherwise subject to the 

NRC’s regulatory oversight. This class 

includes applicants and potential 

applicants for licenses and other NRC 

regulatory approvals, and who are 

subject to the material to be 

incorporated by reference. In this 

context, ‘‘small entities’’ has the same 

meaning as set out in 10 CFR 2.810. 

• Large entities otherwise subject to 

the NRC’s regulatory oversight. This 

class includes applicants and potential 

applicants for licenses and other NRC 

regulatory approvals, and who are 

subject to the material to be 

incorporated by reference. In this 

context, a ‘‘large entity’’ is one that does 

not qualify as a ‘‘small entity’’ under 10 

CFR 2.810. 

• Non-governmental organizations 

with institutional interests in the 

matters regulated by the NRC. 

• Other Federal agencies, states, local 

governmental bodies (within the 

meaning of 10 CFR 2.315(c)). 

• Federally-recognized and Staterecognized Indian tribes. 

• Members of the general public (i.e., 

individual, unaffiliated members of the 

public who are not regulated or 

otherwise subject to the NRC’s 

regulatory oversight) who need access to 

the materials that the NRC proposes to 

incorporate by reference in order to 

participate in the rulemaking. 

The NUREG–2228 and three draft RGs 

that the NRC proposes to incorporate by 

reference in this proposed rule are 

available without cost and can be read 

online or downloaded online. The 

NUREG–2228 and draft RGs can be 

viewed, by appointment, at the NRC 

Technical Library, which is located at 

Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852; 

telephone: 301–415–7000; email: 

Library.Resource@nrc.gov. The final 

RGs, if approved by the OFR for 

incorporation by reference, will also be 

available for inspection at the OFR, as 

described in 10 CFR 50.55a(a). 

Because access to the three draft 

regulatory guides, and eventually, the 

final regulatory guides, are available in 

various forms at no cost, the NRC 

determines that the three draft 

regulatory guides, DG–1366, DG–1367, 

and DG–1368, and final RG 1.84, 

Revision 39; RG 1.147, Revision 20; and 

RG 1.192, Revision 4, once approved by 

the OFR for incorporation by reference, 

are reasonably available to all interested 

parties. 

XIII. Availability of Documents 

The documents identified in the 

following tables are available to 

interested persons through one or more 

of the following methods, as indicated. 

Throughout the development of this 

rule, the NRC may post documents 

related to this rule, including public 

comments, on the Federal rulemaking 

website at: https://www.regulations.gov 

under Docket ID NRC–2017–0025. The 

Federal rulemaking website allows you 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7835 

to receive alerts when changes or 

additions occur in a docket folder. To 

subscribe: (1) Navigate to the docket 

folder (NRC–2017–0025); (2) click the 

‘‘Sign up for Email Alerts’’ link; and (3) 

enter your email address and select how 

frequently you would like to receive 

emails (daily, weekly, or monthly). 

TABLE III—RULEMAKING RELATED DOCUMENTS

Document title 

ADAMS Accession No. 

or Federal Register 

citation, or website 

Final Rule — ‘‘Incorporation by Reference of ASME BPV and OM Code Cases,’’ July 8, 2003 ............................... 68 FR 40469. 

Final Rule — ‘‘Incorporation by Reference of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Codes and Code 

Cases,’’ July 18, 2017.

82 FR 32934. 

Zorita Internals Research Project (MRP–440) Testing of Highly-Irradiated Baffle Plate Material 3002016015 Final 

Report, October 2019.

Available for purchase. 

ASME Code, Section III, NB–2330, ‘‘Test Requirements and Acceptance Standards,’’ July 2017 ........................... Available for purchase. 

BWRVIP–75–A, ‘‘BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Technical Basis for Revisions to Generic Letter 88–01 Inspection Schedules,’’ October 2005.Available for purchase. 

Final Rule — ‘‘Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers’ Code Cases,’’ March 16, 2020 ................. 85 FR 14736. 

RG 1.193, ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use, Revision 7 (DG–1369) .......................................................... ML20120A627. 

Rulemaking—Proposed Rule—Regulatory Analysis for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code 

Cases, RG 1.84, Rev 39; RG 1.147, Rev 20; RG 1.192, Rev 4; and RG 1.193, Rev 7.

ML20133K152. 

GL–88–01, Supplement 1, ‘‘NRC Position on Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) in BWR Austenitic 

Stainless Steel Piping (Generic Letter 88–01, Supplement 1),’’ February 4, 1992.

https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/gencomm/gen-letters/1988/ 

gl88001s1.html. 

GL–88–01, ‘‘NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping (Generic Letter No. 88–01),’’ January 25, 1988.https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/gencomm/gen-letters/1988/ 

gl88001.html. 

Final Rule—‘‘Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers 2015–20017 Code Editions, Incorporataion 

by Reference,’’ May 4, 2020.

85 FR 26540. 

Documents Proposed To Be 

Incorporated by Reference 

The NRC proposes to incorporate by 

reference three NRC RGs, as set forth in 

Table IV, that list new and revised 

ASME Code Cases that the NRC has 

approved as voluntary alternatives to 

certain provisions of NRC-required 

Editions and Addenda of the ASME 

BPV Code and the ASME OM Code. The 

NRC also proposes to incorporate by 

reference NUREG–2228, as set forth in 

Table V, that is referenced within a 

condition in RG 1.147, Revision 20. 

TABLE IV—DRAFT REGULATORY GUIDES PROPOSED TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN 10 CFR 50.55a 

Document title ADAMS Accession No./ 

Federal Register citation 

RG 1.84, Design, Fabrication, and Materials Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III, Revision 39, (DG–1366) ML20120A633. 

RG 1.147, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1, Revision 20, (DG–1367) ML20120A631. 

RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code, Revision 4, (DG–1368) .......... ML20120A629. 

TABLE V—RELATED DOCUMENTS PROPOSED TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN 10 CFR 50.55a 

Document title ADAMS Accession No. 

NUREG–2228, ‘‘Weld Residual Stress Finite Element Analysis Validation: Part II—Proposed Validation Procedure,’’ July 2020.ML20212L592. 

Code Cases for Approval in This 

Proposed Rule 

The ASME BPV Code Cases that the 

NRC is proposing to approve as 

alternatives to certain provisions of the 

ASME BPV Code, as set forth in Table 

VI, are being made available by the 

ASME for read-only access during the 

public comment period on https://

go.asme.org/NRC-ASME-CC. 

The ASME OM Code Cases that the 

NRC is proposing to approve as 

alternatives to certain provisions of the 

ASME OM Code, as set forth in Table 

VI, are being made available for readonly access during the public comment 

period by the ASME on https://

go.asme.org/NRC-ASME-CC. 

The ASME is making the Code Cases 

listed in Table VI available for limited, 

read-only access at the request of the 

NRC. The NRC believes that 

stakeholders need to be able to read 

these Code Cases in order to provide 

meaningful comment on the three RGs 

(listed in Table IV) that the NRC is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

into § 50.55a. It is the NRC’s position 

that the listed Code Cases, as modified 

by any conditions contained in the three 

RGs and thus serving as alternatives to 

requirements in § 50.55a, are legallybinding regulatory requirements. An 

applicant or licensee must comply with 

a listed Code Case and any conditions 

to be within the scope of the NRC’s 

approval of the Code Case as a voluntary 

alternative for use. These requirements 

cannot be fully understood without 

knowledge of the Code Case to which 

the proposed condition applies, and to 

this end, the NRC has requested that the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7836 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

ASME provide limited, read-only access to the Code Cases in order to facilitate 

meaningful public comment. 

TABLE VI—ASME CODE CASES PROPOSED FOR NRC APPROVAL

Code Case No. Supplement Title 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III 

N–71–20 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Additional Materials for Subsection NF, Class 1, 2, 3, and MC Supports Fabricated by 

Welding, Section III, Division 1. 

N–155–3 ...................... 5 (2015 Edition) ............. Fiberglass Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Pipe, Section III, Division 1. 

N–249–17 .................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Additional Materials for Subsection NF, Classes 1, 2, 3, and MC Supports Fabricated without Welding Section III, Division 1. 

N–539–1 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. UNS N08367 in Class 2 and 3 Valves, Section III, Division 1. 

N–692–1 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Use of Standard Welding Procedures, Section III, Division 1. 

N–721–1 ...................... 5 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Rules for Linear Piping Supports, Section III, Division 1. 

N–755–4 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Polyethylene (PE) Class 3 Plastic Pipe, Section III, Division 1. 

N–779 .......................... 9 (2007 Edition) ............. Alternative Rules for Simplified Elastic-Plastic Analysis Class 1, Section III, Division 1. 

N–801–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Rules for Repair of N-Stamped Class 1, 2, and 3 Components, Section III, Division 1. 

N–822–4 ...................... 7 (2015 Edition) ............. Application of the ASME Certification Mark, Section III, Divisions 1, 2, 3, and 5. 

N–852 .......................... 0 (2015 Edition) ............. Application of the ASME NPT Stamp, Section III, Divisions 1, 2, 3, and 5. 

N–855 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. SB–148 C95800 Valves for Class 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1. 

N–856 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. SA–494 Grade CW–12MW (UNS N30002) Nickel Alloy Castings for Construction of NPS 

21⁄2 and Smaller Flanged Valves for Class 3 Construction, Section III, Division 1. 

N–859 .......................... 5 (2015 Edition) ............. Construction of ASME B16.9 Wrought Buttwelding Fittings and ASME B16.11 Forged Fittings Made From SB–366 UNS N04400 Material for Section III, Class 3 Construction, 

Section III, Division 1. 

N–863–1 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Post Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT) of Valve Seal Welds for P4 and P5A Materials, Section 

III, Division 1. 

N–866 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Materials for Construction of Section III, Class 2 Vessels, Section III, Division 1. 

N–870–1 ...................... 4 (2017 Edition) ............. Rules for the Elimination of External Surface Defects on Class 1, 2, and 3 Piping, Pumps, 

or Valves After Component Stamping and Prior to Completion of the N–3 Data Report, 

Section III, Division 1. 

N–879 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Micro-Alloyed Carbon Steel Bar in Patented Mechanical Joints and Fittings, Classes 

1, 2, and 3, Section III, Division 1. 

N–883 .......................... 5 (2017 Edition) ............. Construction of Items Prior to the Establishment of a Section III, Division 1 Owner, Section 

III, Division 1. 

N–884 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Procedure to Determine Strain Rate for Use with the Environmental Fatigue Design Curve 

Method and the Environmental Fatigue Correction Factor, Fen, Method as Part of an Environmental Fatigue Evaluation for Components Analyzed per the NB–3200 Rules, Section III, Division 1. 

N–886 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Use of Polyethylene Pipe for Class 3, Section III, Division 1. 

N–887 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition with errata dated August 30, 

2019).

Alternatives to the Requirements of NB–4424.2(a), Figure NB–4250–2, and Figure NB– 

4250–3 Section III, Division 1. 

N–891 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements to Appendix XXVI, XXVI–2400, XXVI–4130, and XXVI–4131 for 

Inspection and Repair of Indentations for Polyethylene Pipe and Piping Components, 

Section III, Division 1. 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI 

N–513–5 ...................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in Moderate Energy Class 2 or 3 

Piping and Gate Valves, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–516–5 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Underwater Welding, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–561–3 ...................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Wall Thickness Restoration of Class 2 and High Energy Class 

3 Carbon Steel Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–638–10 .................... 1 (2019 Edition) ............. Similar and Dissimilar Metal Welding Using Ambient Temperature Machine GTAW Temper 

Bead Technique, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–653–2 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Qualification Requirements for Full Structural Overlaid Wrought Austenitic Piping Welds, 

Section XI, Division 1. 

N–702–1 ...................... 1 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) Nozzle Inner Radius and Nozzle-to-Shell Welds, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–705–1 ...................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Degradation in Moderate Energy Class 2 

or 3 Vessels and Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–716–2 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Piping Classification and Examination Requirements, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–766–3 ...................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Nickel Alloy Reactor Coolant Inlay and Onlay for Mitigation of PWR Full Penetration Circumferential Nickel Alloy Dissimilar Metal Welds in Class 1 Items, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–768 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Volumetric Coverage Requirements for Ultrasonic Examination of Class 1 and 2 

Pressure Vessel Weld Joints Greater Than 2 in. (50 mm) in Thickness, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–786–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Sleeve Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Moderate Energy 

Carbon Steel Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–789–3 ...................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Pad Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Moderate Energy Carbon Steel Piping for Raw Water Service, Section XI, Division 1. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7837 

4The column labelled ‘‘Edition’’ in this table 

refers to the point in time a Code Case was issued. 

For example, an entry associated with the 2017 

Edition means the Code Case was issued at the 

same time as the 2017 Edition of the Code. 

TABLE VI—ASME CODE CASES PROPOSED FOR NRC APPROVAL—Continued 

Code Case No. Supplement Title 

N–809 .......................... 2 (2015 Edition) ............. Reference Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Curves for Austenitic Stainless Steels in Pressurized Reactor Water Environments, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–831–1 ...................... 1 (2019 Edition) ............. Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of Radiography for Welds in Ferritic or Austenitic Pipe, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–845–1 ...................... 6 (2015 Edition) ............. Qualification Requirements for Bolts and Studs, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–847 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Partial Excavation and Deposition of Weld Metal for Mitigation of Class 1 Items, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

N–848–1 ...................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Characterization Rules for Quazi-Laminar Flaws, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–851 .......................... 0 (2015 Edition) ............. Alternate Method for Establishing the Reference Temperature for Pressure Retaining Materials, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–858 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Volumetric Coverage Requirements for Ultrasonic Examination of Class 1 Nozzle-to-Vessel Welds, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–864 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Reactor Vessel Threads in Flange Examinations, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–865 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Pad Reinforcement of Class 2 and 3 Atmospheric Storage 

Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–867 .......................... 0 (2017 Edition) ............. Clarification of NDE Practical Examination Requirements, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–869 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in Class 2 or 3 Piping, Section XI, 

Division 1. 

N–873 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Examination Requirements for the Core Makeup Tanks, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–874 .......................... 7 (2017 Edition) ............. Temporary Acceptance of Leakage Through Brazed Joints of Class 3 Copper, CopperNickel, and Nickel-Copper Moderate Energy Piping, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–876 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Austenitic Stainless Steel Cladding and Nickel Base Cladding Using Ambient Temperature 

Automatic or Machine Dry Underwater Laser Beam Welding (ULBW) Temper Bead 

Technique, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–877 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Characterization Rules for Multiple Subsurface Radially Oriented Planar Flaws, 

Section XI, Division 1. 

N–878 .......................... 1 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative to QA Program Requirements of IWA–4142, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–880 .......................... 2 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative to Procurement Requirements of IWA–4143 for Small Nonstandard Welded Fittings, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–882 .......................... 6 (2017 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Attaching Nonstructural Electrical Connections to Class 2 and 

3 Components, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–885 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Table IWB–2500–1, Examination Category B–N–1, Interior of 

Reactor Vessel, Category B–N–2, Welded Core Support Structures and Interior Attachments to Reactor Vessels, Category B–N–3, Removable Core Support Structures Section XI, Division 1. 

N–889 .......................... 7 (2017 Edition) ............. Reference Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Rate Curves for Irradiated Austenitic Stainless 

Steel in Light-Water Reactor Environments, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–890 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Materials Exempted From G–2110(b) Requirement, Section XI, Division 1. 

N–892 .......................... 0 (2019 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirement for Form OAR–1, Owner’s Activity Report, Completion Time, Section XI, Division 1. 

Operation and Maintenance Code 

Code Case No. Edition 4 Title 

OMN–13, Revision 3 ... 2020 Edition ................... Performance-Based Requirements for Extending Snubber Inservice Visual Examination Interval at LWR Power Plants. 

OMN–15, Revision 3 ... 2020 Edition ................... Performance-Based Requirements for Extending the Snubber Operational Readiness Testing Interval at LWR Power Plants. 

OMN–17, Revision 1 ... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing ASME Class 1 Pressure Relief/Safety Valves. 

OMN–22 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Smooth Running Pumps. 

OMN–23 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Pressure Isolation Valves. 

OMN–24 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing ASME Class 2 and 3 Pressure Relief Valves (For Relief Valves in a Group of One). 

OMN–25 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Appendix I Pressure Relief Valves. 

OMN–26 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternate Risk-Informed and Margin Based Rules for Inservice Testing of Motor Operated 

Valves. 

OMN–27 ....................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternative Requirements for Testing Category A Valves (Non-PIV/CIV). 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 

Antitrust, Classified information, 

Criminal penalties, Fire protection, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear 

power plantsand reactors, Radiation 

protection, Reactor siting criteria, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble and under the authority of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; 

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 

as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC 

is proposing to adopt the following 

amendments to 10 CFR part 50: 

PART 50—DOMESTIC LICENSING OF 

PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 

FACILITIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 50 

continues to read as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7838 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 

secs. 11, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, 122, 

147, 149, 161, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 

187, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2131, 

2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2138, 2152, 2167, 

2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2235, 

2236, 2237, 2239, 2273, 2282); Energy 

Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202, 

206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, sec. 306 

(42 U.S.C. 10226); National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332); 44 U.S.C. 

3504 note; Sec. 109, Pub. L. 96–295, 94 Stat. 

783. 

■ 2. In § 50.55a: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a)(3) introductory 

text; 

■ b. In paragraph (a)(3)(i), remove the 

phrase ‘‘Revision 38’’ and add in its 

place the phrase ‘‘Revision 39’’ and 

remove the phrase ‘‘October 2019’’ and 

add in its place the phrase ‘‘MONTH/ 

YEAR’’; 

■ c. In paragraph (a)(3)(ii), remove the 

phrase ‘‘Revision 19’’ and add in its 

place the phrase ‘‘Revision 20’’ and 

remove the phrase ‘‘October 2019’’ and 

add in its place the phrase ‘‘MONTH/ 

YEAR’’; 

■ d. In paragraph (a)(3)(iii), remove the 

phrase ‘‘Revision 3’’ and add in its place 

the phrase ‘‘Revision 4’’ and remove the 

phrase ‘‘October 2019’’ and add in its 

place the phrase ‘‘MONTH/YEAR’’; 

■ e. Add paragraph (a)(3)(iv); and 

■ f. In paragraph (b)(3)(iv), Table II, 

remove the word ‘‘(years)’’ in the second 

and third column headings and add in 

their places the word ‘‘(Years)’’. 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 50.55a Codes and standards. 

(a) * * * 

(3) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) Public Document 

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852; telephone: 1–800– 

397–4209; email: pdr.resource@nrc.gov; 

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/reg-guides/. The use of Code 

Cases listed in the NRC regulatory 

guides in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through 

(iii) of this section is acceptable with the 

specified conditions in those guides 

when implementing the editions and 

addenda of the ASME BPV Code and 

ASME OM Code incorporated by 

reference in paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section. The NRC report in paragraph 

(a)(3)(iv) of this section is acceptable as 

specified in the conditions when 

implementing Code Cases listed in the 

NRC regulatory guides in paragraphs 

(a)(3)(i) through (iii). 

* * * * * 

(iv) NUREG–2228. NUREG–2228, 

‘‘Weld Residual Stress Finite Element 

Analysis Validation: Part II—Proposed 

Validation Procedure,’’ dated July 2020, 

which is referenced in RG 1.147, 

Revision 20. 

* * * * * 

Dated December 23, 2020. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Ho K. Nieh, 

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00890 Filed 2–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

23 CFR Parts 470, 635, and 655 

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2020–0001] 

RIN 2125–AF85 

National Standards for Traffic Control 

Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic 

Control Devices for Streets and 

Highways; Revision 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), U.S. 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: FHWA is extending the 

comment period for a notice of 

proposed amendments (NPA) and 

request for comments, which was 

published on December 14, 2020 in the 

Federal Register. The original comment 

period is set to close on March 15, 2021. 

The extension is based on concern 

expressed by a number of stakeholders 

that, as a result of the scope and 

complexity of the NPA, the March 15, 

2021, closing date does not provide 

sufficient time to review and provide 

comprehensive comments. The FHWA 

recognizes that others interested in 

commenting may have similar concerns 

and agrees that the comment period 

should be extended. Therefore, the 

closing date for comments is changed to 

May 14, 2021, which will provide 

stakeholders and others interested in 

commenting additional time to discuss, 

evaluate, and submit responses to the 

docket. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 14, 2021. Late-filed 

comments will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not 

duplicate your docket submissions, 

please submit them by only one of the 

following means: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; 

• Hand Delivery: West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9 a.m. 5 

p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The telephone 

number is (202) 366–9329; 

• Instructions: You must include the 

agency name and docket number or the 

Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 

for the rulemaking at the beginning of 

your comments. All comments received 

will be posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Kevin Sylvester, Office of 

Transportation Operations, (202) 366– 

2161, Kevin.Sylvester@dot.gov, or Mr. 

William Winne, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, (202) 366–1397, 

William.Winne@dot.gov, Federal 

Highway Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access and Filing 

This document and all comments 

received may be viewed online through 

the Federal eRulemaking portal at 

http://www.regulations.gov. The website 

is available 24 hours each day, 365 days 

each year. An electronic copy of this 

document may also be downloaded by 

accessing the Office of the Federal 

Register’s home page at: https://

www.federalregister.gov. 

Background 

The Manual on Uniform Traffic 

Control Devices for Streets and 

Highways (MUTCD) is incorporated in 

FHWA regulations and recognized as 

the national standard for traffic control 

devices used on all public roads. On 

December 14, 2020, at 85 FR 80898, 

FHWA published in the Federal 

Register an NPA proposing to revise 

standards, guidance, options, and 

supporting information relating to the 

traffic control devices in all parts of the 

MUTCD. The original comment period 

for the NPA closes on March 15, 2021. 

Stakeholders have expressed concern 

that this closing date does not provide 

sufficient time to review and provide 

comprehensive comments on the 

proposal. The FHWA recognizes that 

others interested in commenting may 

have similar concerns and agrees that 

the comment period should be extended 

by 60 days for these organizations and 

others to submit comprehensive 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS