11934 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

heading for subpart G, consisting of 

§§ 201.29 through 201.34, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart G—Market Agency, Dealer, 

and Packer Bonds 

■ 10. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.39 and add a 

heading for subpart H, consisting of 

§§ 201.39 through 201.42, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart H—Proceeds of Sale 

■ 11. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.43 and add a 

heading for subpart I, consisting of 

§§ 201.43 through 201.49, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart I—Accounts and Records 

■ 12. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.53 and add a 

heading for subpart J, consisting of 

§§ 201.53 through 201.70, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart J—Trade Practices 

■ 13. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.71 and add a 

heading for subpart K, consisting of 

§§ 201.71 through 201.82, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart K—Services 

■ 14. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.86 and add a 

heading for subpart L, consisting of 

§§ 201.86, in its place to read as follows: 

Subpart L—Inspection of Brands 

■ 15. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.94 and add a 

heading for subpart M, consisting of 

§§ 201.94 through 201.99, in its place to 

read as follows: 

Subpart M—General 

■ 16. Remove the undesignated center 

heading before § 201.100 and add a 

heading for subpart N, consisting of 

§§ 201.100 through 201.218, in its place 

to read as follows: 

Subpart N—Packers and Live Poultry 

Dealers 

Erin Morris, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04172 Filed 3–2–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 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: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is amending its 

regulations to incorporate by reference 

revisions of three regulatory guides to 

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 

condition on one of the regulatory 

guides. This action allows 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 

regulatory guides as voluntary 

alternatives to engineering standards for 

the construction, inservice inspection, 

and inservice testing of nuclear power 

plant components. These engineering 

standards are set forth in the American 

Society of Mechanical Engineers’ Boiler 

and Pressure Vessel Codes and 

American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers’ Operation and Maintenance 

Codes, which are currently incorporated 

by reference into the NRC’s regulations. 

Further, this final rule announces the 

availability of a related regulatory guide, 

not incorporated by reference into the 

NRC’s regulations, that lists code cases 

that the NRC has not approved for use. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

April 4, 2022. The incorporation by 

reference of certain publications listed 

in the regulation is approved by the 

Director of the Federal Register as of 

April 4, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 

NRC–2017–0025 when contacting the 

NRC about the availability of 

information for this action. You may 

obtain publicly-available 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. 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. 

• 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 

‘‘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. 

• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 

purchase copies of public documents, 

by appointment, at the NRC’s PDR, 

Room P1 B35, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. To make an 

appointment to visit the PDR, please 

send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov 

or call 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415– 

4737, between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. 

(ET), Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Technical Library: The Technical 

Library, which is located at Two White 

Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, Maryland 20852, is open by 

appointment only. Interested parties 

may make appointments to examine 

documents by contacting the NRC 

Technical Library by email at 

Library.Resource@nrc.gov between 8:00 

a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (ET), Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Martha Barillas, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards; 

telephone: 301–415–2760, email: 

Martha.Barillas@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). This 

regulatory action is also incorporating 

by reference, NUREG–2228, ‘‘Weld 

Residual Stress Finite Element Analysis 

Validation: Part II—Proposed Validation 

Procedure,’’ that is associated with a 

condition in one of the regulatory 

guides. The three RGs identify new, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11935 

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. 

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, Division 1, OM 

Code: Section IST (OM Code), currently 

incorporated by reference into the 

NRC’s regulations. 

B. Major Provisions 

The three RGs that the NRC is 

incorporating by reference are RG 1.84, 

‘‘Design, Fabrication, and Materials 

Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section 

III,’’ Revision 39; RG 1.147, ‘‘Inservice 

Inspection Code Case Acceptability, 

ASME Section XI, Division 1,’’ Revision 

20; and RG 1.192, ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance [OM] Code Case 

Acceptability, ASME OM Code,’’ 

Revision 4. The NRC is also 

incorporating by reference NUREG– 

2228, which provides the procedure for 

validating the weld residual stress 

analysis methodology associated with 

ASME Code Case N–847. This final rule 

allows 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. In this document, the 

NRC also notifies the public of the 

availability of RG 1.193, ‘‘ASME Code 

Cases Not Approved for Use,’’ Revision 

7. This document lists code cases that 

the NRC has not approved for generic 

use and is not incorporated by reference 

into the NRC’s regulations. 

The NRC prepared a regulatory 

analysis to determine the expected 

quantitative costs and benefits of this 

final rule, as well as qualitative factors 

to be considered in the NRC’s 

rulemaking decision. The analysis 

concluded that this rule results in net 

savings to the industry and the NRC. As 

shown in Table 1, the estimated total 

net benefits relative to the regulatory 

baseline range from approximately 

$5.86 million (7-percent net present 

value) to $6.67 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 ....................................................................................................................... 4,920,000 3,920,000 4,450,000 

Total Industry Costs ............................................................................................................. 4,920,000 3,920,000 4,450,000 

NRC Implementation ................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

NRC Operation ............................................................................................................................ 2,460,000 1,940,000 2,220,000 

Total NRC Costs .................................................................................................................. 2,460,000 1,940,000 2,220,000 

Net ................................................................................................................................. 7,380,000 5,860,000 6,670,000 

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 

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 regulatory analysis concludes 

that this final 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 final regulatory analysis as 

indicated in Section XVI, ‘‘Availability 

of Documents,’’ of this document. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Discussion 

III. Opportunities for Public Participation 

IV. Public Comment Analysis 

V. Section-by-Section Analysis 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification 

VII. Regulatory Analysis 

VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality 

IX. Plain Writing 

X. Environmental Assessment and Final 

Finding of No Significant Environmental 

Impact 

XI. Paperwork Reduction Act 

XII. Congressional Review Act 

XIII. Voluntary Consensus Standards 

XIV. Incorporation by ReferenceReasonable Availability to Interested 

Parties 

XV. Availability of Guidance 

XVI. Availability of Documents 

I. 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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11936 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

4The ASME included code cases with the 

published editions and addenda of the OM Code 

through the 2017 Edition. Starting with the 2020 

Edition, code cases were not published with the 

OM Code; an applicability index for ASME OM 

code cases was published. Code cases are available 

on the ASME website under the ‘‘O&M CASES’’ tab 

in the left-hand column at https://go.asme.org/ 

OMcommittee. 

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 final 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, 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. 

II. Discussion 

This final rule incorporates 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, 

supersedes the incorporation by 

reference of Revision 38; RG 1.147, 

Revision 20, supersedes the 

incorporation by reference of Revision 

19; and RG 1.192, Revision 4, 

supersedes the incorporation by 

reference of Revision 3. 

The ASME code cases that are the 

subject of this final 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 

and on the ASME Codes & Standards 

(C&S) Connect website.4

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 

final rule incorporates 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 requiring the use of 

NUREG–2228 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 and on the 

ASME C&S Connect website. In 

contrast, the ASME publishes BPV code 

cases in a separate document and at a 

different time than the ASME BPV code 

editions. This final 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 

final 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 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)). 

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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11937 

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 unless it was 

applied prior to being annulled or 

superseded. 

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. 

A. ASME Code Cases Approved for 

Unconditional Use 

The code cases discussed in Table I 

are new, revised, or reaffirmed code 

cases in which the NRC approves for 

use without conditions. The table 

identifies the regulatory guide listing 

the applicable code case that the NRC 

approves for use. 

TABLE I—ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III 

(Addressed in RG 1.84, 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 RG 1.147, 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11938 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

5As a result of a public comment, the NRC agreed 

that the condition to require the slightly more 

restrictive upper-end values of the acceptable 

ranges for flow and differential pressure are not 

necessary to provide reasonable assurance that the 

implementation of Code Case OMN–18 will 

demonstrate the acceptable performance of pumps 

within the scope of the ASME OM Code. Therefore, 

the NRC deleted the condition proposed and moved 

OMN–18 to Table I. 

TABLE I—ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES—Continued 

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

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. 

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 RG 1.192, 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–18 5 .................... 2020 Edition ................... Alternate Testing Requirements for Pumps Tested Quarterly Within ±20% of Design Flow. 

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. ASME Code Cases Approved for Use 

With Conditions 

The NRC 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 imposes conditions on the use of 

these code cases to modify, limit, or 

clarify their requirements. The 

conditions 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 below, are 

included in Table 2 of RG 1.84, RG 

1.147, and 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11939 

6Correcting editorial error from proposed rule to 

final rule to state correct supplement 8. 

TABLE II—CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE CODE CASES

Code Case No. Published with 

supplement Title 

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III 

(Addressed in RG 1.84, 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 .......................... 8 (2007 Edition) 6 ........... 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 RG 1.147, 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. 

N–597–3 ...................... 5 (2013 Edition) ............. Evaluation of Pipe Wall Thinning, Section XI. 

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–778 .......................... 0 (2010 Edition) ............. Alternative Requirements for Preparation and Submittal of Inservice Inspection Plans, 

Schedules, and Preservice and Inservice Inspection Summary Reports, 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 RG 1.192, 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–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 (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 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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11940 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

it possible for the NRC to remove the 

conditions. Therefore, the conditions 

are 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 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 are 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 the 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 8, 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. 

The NRC approved this code case 

with a condition in a § 50.55a 

rulemaking issued in 2017 (82 FR 

32934; July 18, 2017), and the 

supplement was not modified in a way 

that would make it possible for the NRC 

to remove the condition. Therefore, the 

condition is retained in Revision 39 of 

RG 1.84. 

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 

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. As a result of public 

comment, the NRC clarified the 

condition on the code case as follows: 

‘‘This Code Case may only 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 10 CFR part 52. This Code Case 

may not be used by a holder of a 

manufacturing license or standard 

design approval or by a design 

certification applicant.’’ 

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. One 

additional condition is needed for above 

ground applications related to fire 

protection. A condition on fire 

protection is needed because 

polyethylene material is combustible 

and above ground uses are more 

susceptible to fire hazards. 

The NRC agreed with the public 

comments to remove conditions 1, 2, 

and 3 because the three conditions are 

the same as those for Section III, 

Mandatory Appendix XXVI, which was 

conditionally accepted by the NRC in 

§ 50.55a. It is redundant to specify these 

conditions to Code Case N–886. 

As a result of public comment, the 

NRC clarified condition 4 to state that 

for aboveground applications, licensees 

must ensure that plant fire protection 

program addresses any high-density 

polyethylene (HDPE) consistent with 

the requirements of 10 CFR 50.48. The 

licensee must identify the specific 

program to satisfy this objective such as 

the plant fire protection program. 

Therefore, the condition is retained in 

Revision 39 of RG 1.84. 

The NRC agreed with the public 

comment to remove condition 5 because 

the requirement that carbon black 

distribution in HDPE pipe to be 

homogenous to prevent windows and 

delamination is a pipe manufacturing 

process issue. The staff determined that 

the requirements in Mandatory 

Appendix XXVI–2231(b) adequately 

address this issue. Code Case N–886 is 

only for design, and all materials must 

meet the requirements of Appendix 

XXVI. 

2. ASME BPV Code, Section XI Code 

Cases (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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11941 

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 that the augmented 

examination provisions in Section 5 of 

the code case require clarification. 

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, 

imposes 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 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 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. The NRC agreed with the 

public comment that Condition 2 

needed clarification. As a result, the 

NRC revised Condition No. 2 as follows: 

‘‘For the purposes of section 5 of Code 

Case N–513–5, the term ‘‘significant 

flaw’’ means any flaw found during 

augmented examinations performed per 

Section 5 of N–513–5 that has a depth 

greater than 75 percent of the pipe wall 

thickness or that does not satisfy the 

applicable requirements of the flaw 

evaluation per Section 3 of N–513–5. If 

a significant flaw as defined above is 

present, then the licensee must perform 

the additional augmented examination 

specified in Section 5.’’ 

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; September 

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., nickel-based alloys) and 

austenitic P-No. 8 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 are 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–597–3 [Supplement 5, 

2013 Edition] 

Type: Revised. 

Title: Evaluation of Pipe Wall 

Thinning, Section XI. 

Based on public comments, the NRC 

found that existing Condition 2(b) 

references Figure–3622.1(a)(1), which 

does not exist in Code Case N–597–3. 

The NRC revised Condition 2(b) in the 

final rule to reference Figure 3622–1 of 

the 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 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 is 

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 

Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) Full 

Penetration Circumferential Nickel 

Alloy Dissimilar Metal Welds in Class 1 

Items, Section XI, Division 1. 

The 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 

are retained in Revision 20 of RG 1.147. 

Code Case N–778 [Supplement 0, 2010 

Edition] 

Type: New. 

Title: Alternative Requirements for 

Preparation and Submittal of Inservice 

Inspection Plans, Schedules, and 

Preservice and Inservice Inspection 

Summary Reports, Section XI, Division 

1. 

Code Case N–778 was originally listed 

in Table 2 of Revision 18 of RG 1.147 

with two conditions. As a result of 

public comments, the NRC revised the 

second condition on Code Case N–778 

to be consistent with Code Case N–892 

by increasing the time period for 

submittal of the inservice inspection 

summary report to 120 days following 

the completion of each refueling outage. 

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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11942 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

The 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 is 

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. 

The 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 

environments 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–770–5. 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 imposing six conditions to 

ensure the inservice inspection 

frequency guidelines of the code case 

are consistent 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 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 further 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. The NRC requires, through the 

first condition, that approval of the use 

of this code case is only for the 

application of the 360-degree EWR. 

The second 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. 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 condition is related to 

Section 2(d) 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 SCCsusceptible and less susceptible 

material. It was demonstrated that the 

crack can branch and propagate in a 

direction normal to the original 

direction along a SCC-susceptible 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. The 

NRC requires, through the third 

condition, that flaw analysis include the 

potential for crack growth through the 

dilution zone including crack 

branching. 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). As a result of public 

comment, the NRC agrees this condition 

should be updated to reference Section 

2(d)(1), rather than 2(d)(2) as discussed 

in the proposed rule (86 FR 7820, 

February 2, 2021), for nickel-based 

alloys. The NRC clarified the condition 

to state the evaluation in Section 2(d)(1) 

of the code case must include 

evaluation of crack growth into the 

Alloy 690 weld material, including the 

dilution zones and allowing change in 

flaw growth direction. 

The fourth condition is related to 

Section 2 of the code case. The NRC is 

requiring the use of NUREG–2228, 

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 °F to 558 °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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11943 

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, the design that 

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 longterm 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, are acceptable, subject 

to the fifth condition, 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 eliminates 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 10-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-inflange receives some level of 

monitoring. These activities typically 

have included 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 imposing 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 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. This condition also 

limits the application of Code Case N– 

864 at facilities that have been 

authorized under § 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 condition in Code Case 

N–864 ensures that sufficient 

monitoring and maintenance activities 

are performed and documented when 

the code case is applied. As a result of 

public comments, the NRC clarified that 

performing and documenting the 

facility’s maintenance procedures for 

removal, care, and visual inspection of 

the reactor head closure studs and 

threads in flange during each refueling 

outage are sufficient to satisfy the 

second condition. 

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 unclear and need additional 

clarification. 

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 

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, 

imposes 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 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 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 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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11944 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 imposing two conditions 

on this code case. The first 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 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 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 

imposing the same condition to uses of 

Code Case N–876. 

The second 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 

imposing 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 imposing 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. 

The first condition states for ASME 

Section III items, the Licensee must 

review the fabricator’s design 

documentation and methods to ensure 

the fittings design is in compliance with 

the Licensee’s design specifications, and 

ASME Section III NB/NC/ND–3671.7 

requirements; and either (1) supervise 

and monitor the performance 

qualification tests of the fittings to 

ensure the design is in compliance with 

the Licensee’s design specifications and 

ASME Section III NB/NC/ND–3671.7, or 

(2) the Licensee or Repair/Replacement 

Organization conducts qualification 

tests of the fittings or conducts design 

analyses to ensure the design is in 

compliance with the Licensee’s design 

specifications and ASME Section III NB/ 

NC/ND–3671.7. In response to public 

comments, the NRC clarified that for 

ASME Section III items, this condition 

applies only for those licensees that 

implemented ASME Code, Section III 

design requirements for their original 

construction code and/or the licensees 

that have upgraded their original design 

requirements to ASME Code, Section III. 

The second condition states that the 

Licensees must give the Authorized 

Nuclear Inservice Inspector an 

opportunity to review the design report 

prior to installation. 

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 

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 imposing 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. 

The first condition states for ASME 

Section III items, the Licensee must 

review the fabricator’s design 

documentation and methods to ensure 

the fittings design is in compliance with 

the Licensee’s design specifications, and 

ASME Section III NB/NC/ND–3671.7 

requirements; and either: (1) Supervise 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11945 

and monitor the performance 

qualification tests of the fittings to 

ensure the design is in compliance with 

the Licensee’s design specifications and 

ASME Section III NB/NC/ND–3671.7, or 

(2) the Licensee or Repair/Replacement 

Organization conducts qualification 

tests of the fittings or conducts design 

analyses to ensure the design is in 

compliance with the Licensee’s design 

specifications and ASME Section III NB/ 

NC/ND–3671.7. In response to public 

comments, the NRC clarified that for 

ASME Section III items, this condition 

applies only for those licensees that 

implemented ASME Code, Section III 

design requirements for their original 

construction code and/or the licensees 

that have upgraded their original design 

requirements to ASME Code, Section III. 

The second condition states that the 

Licensees must give the Authorized 

Nuclear Inservice Inspector an 

opportunity to review the design report 

prior to installation. 

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. The 

NRC is imposing three conditions on 

this code case. 

The first 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 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 condition states that the 

irradiated yield stress model for coldworked Molybdenum bearing materials 

must be used for cold-worked nonMolybdenum 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 non-Molybdenum 

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 (Klc) 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 Klc curve). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11946 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 Klc 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. 

As such, the imposed 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 Klc 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 (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 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 are 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 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 are 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 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 are 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 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 are 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 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 are 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 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 are retained in 

Revision 4 of RG 1.192. 

Code Case OMN–20 [2020 Edition] 

Type: Reaffirmed. 

Title: Inservice Test Frequency. 

The 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 are retained in 

Revision 4 of RG 1.192. 

C. ASME Code Cases Not Approved for 

Use (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. RG 1.193 

complements RGs 1.84, 1.147, and 

1.192. It should be noted that the NRC 

is not adopting any of the code cases 

listed in RG 1.193. 

III. Opportunities for Public 

Participation 

The proposed rule and draft RGs were 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 2, 2021 (86 FR 7820), for a 60- 

day comment period. The public 

comment period closed on April 5, 

2021. 

IV. Public Comment Analysis 

The NRC published the proposed rule 

and draft regulatory guides for public 

comment in the Federal Register. The 

NRC received 13 comment submissions. 

A comment submission is a 

communication or document submitted 

to the NRC by an individual or entity, 

with one or more individual comments 

addressing a subject or issue. Private 

citizens provided five comment 

submissions, nuclear industry 

organizations provided five comment 

submissions, a foreign government 

entity provided one comment 

submission, an anonymous commenter 

provided one comment submission, and 

a science advocacy group provided one 

comment submission. 

The comment submissions generally 

addressed the code cases and their 

proposed conditions, with five comment 

submissions objecting to incorporation 

of a code case with no conditions in this 

rulemaking activity. The NRC received 

a number of comments that were 

outside the scope of this rulemaking, 

such as comments that discuss code 

cases annulled after the publication of 

the supplements being considered in 

this rulemaking. The latter group out of 

scope comments will be considered in 

a future rulemaking. 

The public comment submittals are 

available from the Federal e-Rulemaking 

website at https://www.regulations.gov 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11947 

under Docket ID NRC–2017–0025. The 

NRC prepared a summary and analysis 

of public comments received on the 

2020 proposed rule and draft regulatory 

guides, which is available as indicated 

in the ‘‘Availability of Documents’’ 

section of this document. Responses to 

the public comments, including a 

summary of how the final rule text or 

guidance changed as a result of the 

public comments, can be found in the 

public comment analysis. 

For more information about the 

associated guidance documents, see the 

‘‘Availability of Guidance’’ section of 

this document. 

V. Section-by-Section Analysis 

The following paragraphs in § 50.55a 

are revised: 

Paragraph (a) Introductory Text 

This final rule revises the last 

sentence to update the contact 

information for the National Archives 

and Records Administration. 

Paragraph (a)(1) Introductory Text 

This final rule corrects a printing 

error by removing the line break after 

‘‘telephone:’’. 

Paragraph (a)(3) Introductory Text 

This final rule adds a reference to new 

paragraph (a)(3)(iv), which indicates 

that NUREG–2228 is acceptable as 

specified in the conditions when 

implementing code cases listed in 

certain NRC regulatory guides. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(i) 

This final rule revises the reference to 

‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 1.84, Revision 

38,’’ by removing ‘‘Revision 38’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘Revision 39’’ and 

changes the month and year for the 

document’s revision date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(ii) 

This final rule revises the reference to 

‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 

19’’ by removing ‘‘Revision 19’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘Revision 20’’ and 

changes the month and year for the 

document’s revision date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) 

This final rule revises the reference to 

‘‘NRC Regulatory Guide 1.192, Revision 

3’’ by removing ‘‘Revision 3’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘Revision 4’’ and 

changes the month and year for the 

document’s revision date. 

Paragraph (a)(3)(iv) 

This final rule adds new paragraph 

(a)(3)(iv) to reference NUREG–2228, 

‘‘Weld Residual Stress Finite Element 

Analysis Validation: Part II—Proposed 

Validation Procedure,’’ Published July 

2020 (including Errata September 22, 

2021), which is referenced in RG 1.147, 

Revision 20. 

Paragraph (b)(1)(ii), Table 1 

This final rule revises the reference to 

table 1 in the text of the paragraph, and 

designates the table and revises the 

heading of the table to conform to Office 

of the Federal Register (OFR) 

codification requirements. 

Paragraph (b)(2)(xv)(K)(4), Table 2 

This final rule designates the table 

and revises the heading of the table to 

conform to OFR codification 

requirements. 

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

This final rule designates the table 

and revises the heading of the table to 

conform to OFR codification 

requirements, and capitalizes the word 

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

headings. 

VI. 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 final 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 (§ 2.810). 

VII. Regulatory Analysis 

The NRC has prepared a regulatory 

analysis on this regulation. The analysis 

examines the costs and benefits of the 

alternatives considered by the NRC. The 

NRC did not receive public comments 

on the draft regulatory analysis. The 

final regulatory analysis is available as 

indicated in the ‘‘Availability of 

Documents’’ section of this document. 

VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality 

The provisions in this final rule 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 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 final 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. 

IX. 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 31885). 

X. Environmental Assessment and Final 

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. The NRC did not receive 

public comments regarding any aspect 

of this environmental assessment. 

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. 

XI. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final rule amends collections of 

information subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). The collections of information 

were approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget, approval 

number 3150–0011. 

Because the rule will reduce the 

burden for existing information 

collections, the public burden for the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11948 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

information collections is expected to be 

decreased by 230 hours per response. 

This reduction includes the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the 

information collection. 

The information collection is being 

conducted to document the plans for 

and the results of inservice inspection 

and inservice testing programs. The 

records are generally historical in nature 

and provide data on which future 

activities can be based. Information will 

be used by the NRC to determine if 

ASME BPV and OM Code provisions for 

construction, inservice inspection, 

repairs, and inservice testing are being 

properly implemented in accordance 

with § 50.55a of the NRC regulations, or 

whether specific enforcement actions 

are necessary. Responses to this 

collection of information are mandatory 

under § 50.55a. 

You may submit comments on any 

aspect of the information collections, 

including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, 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. 

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. 

XII. Congressional Review Act 

This final rule is a rule as defined in 

the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 

801–808). However, the Office of 

Management and Budget has not found 

it to be a major rule as defined in the 

Congressional Review Act. 

XIII. 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 final 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. 

XIV. Incorporation by ReferenceReasonable Availability to Interested 

Parties 

The NRC is incorporating by reference 

three NRC RGs 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. These 

regulatory guides are RG 1.84, Revision 

39; RG 1.147, Revision 20; and RG 

1.192, Revision 4. The NRC is also 

incorporating by reference NUREG– 

2228, which is referenced in RG 1.147, 

Revision 20. As described in this 

document, this report pertains to a 

condition on Code Case N–847. 

The NRC is required by law to obtain 

approval for incorporation by reference 

from the OFR. The OFR’s requirements 

for incorporation by reference are set 

forth in 1 CFR part 51. The discussion 

in this section complies with the 

requirement for final rules as set forth 

in 1 CFR 51.5(b)(2). 

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 § 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 

§ 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 § 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 RGs that 

the NRC is incorporating by reference in 

this final rule are available without cost 

and can be read online or downloaded 

online. The NUREG–2228 and three 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. 

Because access to NUREG–2228 and 

the three final regulatory guides is 

available in various forms at no cost, the 

NRC determines that NUREG–2228 and 

the three final regulatory guides, 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 11949 

TABLE III—REGULATORY GUIDES 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 .................................... ML21181A225 

RG 1.147, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1, Revision 20 ....................................... ML21181A222 

RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code, Revision 4 ............................................... ML21181A223 

TABLE IV—RELATED DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN 10 CFR 50.55A

Document title 

ADAMS Accession No./ 

Federal Register 

citation 

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

2020 ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ML20212L592 

XV. Availability of Guidance 

The NRC is issuing revised guidance, 

RG 1.193, ‘‘ASME Code Cases Not 

Approved for Use,’’ Revision 7, for the 

implementation of the requirements in 

this final rule. The guidance is available 

as indicated in Section XVI, 

‘‘Availability of Documents,’’ of this 

document. You may access information 

and comment submissions related to the 

guidance by searching on https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

NRC–2017–0025. 

The regulatory guide lists code cases 

that the NRC has not approved for 

generic use and will not be incorporated 

by reference into the NRC’s regulations. 

XVI. 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 

RG 1.84, Design, Fabrication, and Materials Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III, Revision 39, December 2021 ........ ML21181A225 

RG 1.147, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1, Revision 20, December 2021 ........... ML21181A222 

RG 1.192, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code, Revision 4, December 2021 ................... ML21181A223 

RG 1.193, ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use, Revision 7 .............................................................................................. ML21181A224 

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

2020 ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ML20212L592 

Rulemaking–Proposed Rule–Draft 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 .................................................................................................................. ML20133K152 

Rulemaking–Final Rule–Final 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 ............................................................................................................................ ML21196A096 

NRC Responses to Public Comments .......................................................................................................................................... ML21196A100 

Proposed Rule–Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases RG 1.84, Rev 39; RG 1.147, Rev 20; 

RG 1.192 Rev 4 ......................................................................................................................................................................... ML20132A241 

Proposed Rule–Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases RG 1.84, Rev 39; RG 1.147, Rev 20; 

RG 1.192 Rev 4 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 86 FR 7820 

Final Rule–Approval of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code Cases RG 1.84, Rev 38; RG 1.147, Rev 19; RG 

1.192 Rev 3 ................................................................................................................................................................................ 85 FR 14736 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 

Antitrust, Classified information, 

Criminal penalties, Fire protection, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear 

power plants and 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. 552 and 553, 

the NRC is adopting 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: 

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 the last sentence of 

paragraph (a) introductory text and 

paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and 

(a)(3) introductory text; 

■ b. In paragraph (a)(3)(i): 

■ i. Remove the text ‘‘Revision 38’’ and 

add in its place the text ‘‘Revision 39’’; 

and 

■ ii. Remove the text ‘‘dated October 

2019’’ and add in its place the text 

‘‘issued December 2021’’; 

■ c. In paragraph (a)(3)(ii): 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11950 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

■ i. Remove the text ‘‘Revision 19’’ and 

add in its place the text ‘‘Revision 20’’; 

and 

■ ii. Remove the text ‘‘dated October 

2019’’ and add in its place the text 

‘‘issued December 2021’’; 

■ d. In paragraph (a)(3)(iii): 

■ i. Remove the text ‘‘Revision 3’’ and 

add in its place the text ‘‘Revision 4’’; 

and 

■ ii. Remove the text ‘‘dated October 

2019’’ and add in its place the text 

‘‘issued December 2021’’; 

■ e. Add paragraph (a)(3)(iv); 

■ f. In paragraph (b)(1)(ii), remove the 

text ‘‘Table I of this section’’ and add in 

its place the text ‘‘table 1 to this 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)’’; 

■ g. Designate the table immediately 

following paragraph (b)(1)(ii) as table 1 

to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) and revise the 

heading of the newly designated table; 

■ h. Designate the table immediately 

following paragraph (b)(2)(xv)(K)(4) as 

table 2 to paragraph (b)(2)(xv)(K)(4) and 

revise the heading of the newly 

designated table; and 

■ i. Designate the table immediately 

following paragraph (b)(3)(iv) as table 3 

to paragraph (b)(3)(iv) and revise the 

heading and column headings of the 

newly designated table. 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 50.55a Codes and standards. 

(a) * * * For information on the 

availability of this material at NARA, 

email fr.inspection@nara.gov or go to 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. 

(1) American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue, 

New York, NY 10016; telephone: 1– 

800–843–2763; https://www.asme.org/ 

Codes/. 

* * * * * 

(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) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(iv) NUREG–2228. NUREG–2228, 

‘‘Weld Residual Stress Finite Element 

Analysis Validation: Part II—Proposed 

Validation Procedure,’’ Published July 

2020 (including Errata September 22, 

2021), which is referenced in RG 1.147, 

Revision 20. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

Table 1 to Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)— 

Prohibited Code Provisions 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(xv) * * * 

(K) * * * 

(4) * * * 

Table 2 to Paragraph (b)(2)(xv)(K)(4)— 

Table VIII: S7–1—Modified 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iv) * * * 

TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3)(iv)—MAXIMUM INTERVALS FOR USE WHEN APPLYING INTERVAL EXTENSIONS

Group size 

Maximum interval between activities of 

member valves in the groups 

(years) 

Maximum interval between activities of each 

valve in the group 

(years) 

*******

* * * * * 

Dated: January 25, 2022. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Andrea D. Veil, 

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04374 Filed 3–2–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

11 CFR Part 111 

[Notice 2022–04] 

Agency Procedure Concerning the 

Treatment of Foreign State 

Respondents at the Initiation of the 

Enforcement Process 

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 

ACTION: Adoption of Agency procedure. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Election 

Commission is adopting a procedure 

concerning the enforcement process in 

situations where the respondent to a 

complaint is a foreign state, a political 

subdivision of a foreign state, a head of 

state or other foreign official acting in 

his or her official capacity, or an agency 

or instrumentality of a foreign state. 

DATES: The procedure is adopted as of 

March 3, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert Mark Knop, Assistant General 

Counsel, 1050 First Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694 1650 

or (800) 424 9530. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

procedure requires the Commission to 

adopt a supplemental notification 

process in matters involving foreign 

state respondents. 

In all enforcement matters in which a 

foreign state, political subdivision of a 

foreign state, a head of state or other 

foreign official acting in his or her 

official capacity, or any agency or 

instrumentality of a foreign state is 

identified as a respondent, the Office of 

General Counsel (‘‘OGC’’), prior to 

issuing the notification letters required 

by 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(1), will notify the 

Office of the Legal Adviser at the 

Department of State (‘‘Department’’) of 

the receipt of the complaint and of the 

Commission’s statutory notification 

obligations. This procedure does not 

alter the Commission’s statutory 

obligation to issue notification letters to 

respondents within the period required 

by 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(1). 

In such matters, OGC will provide a 

simultaneous report to the Commission 

concerning the notification to the 

Department and will promptly inform 

the Commission of any subsequent 

communications between OGC and the 

Department. 

Within forty-five days of receiving a 

complaint naming a foreign state 

respondent, OGC will make a 

recommendation to the Commission as 

to whether consultation with the 

Department is appropriate to obtain its 

views concerning any legal or factual 

question presented by the matter. 

This notification represents a general 

statement announcing the general 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES