-
7/30/2019 BPVC I Interp Stnd 62 2012 Jul
1/3
SECTION I
Subject Interpretation File No.PG-67.2.6, Isolable Economizer
Pressure Relief Valve
Capacity Requirements (2010 Edition)
.................................................... I-10-26
11-514
PW-11, PW-40.1, PW-52, PFT-11.4, NondestructiveExamination of
Butt Welds (2010 Edition)
.............................................. I-10-27 11-557
PG-109 and PG-112.2.5, Certification and Stampingof Power Piping
(2010 Edition)
..............................................................
I-10-28 11-1961
-
7/30/2019 BPVC I Interp Stnd 62 2012 Jul
2/3
Interpretation: I-10-26
Subject: PG-67.2.6, Isolable Economizer Pressure Relief Valve
Capacity Requirements (2010 Edition)
Date Issued: July 18, 2011
File No.: 11-514
Question: If the Manufacturer predicts that the fluid relieved
from an economizer during overpressure conditions
will be water, does the last sentence of PG-67.2.6 allow the
Manufacturer to select relieving capacity based on water
service only, in lieu of maximum expected heat absorption in
Btu/hr (W) divided by 1,000 (646), as long as this is
sufficient to prevent the pressure from exceeding the limits of
PG-67.2?
Reply: No, the relieving capacity shall be selected to satisfy
both conditions.
Interpretation: I-10-27
Subject: PW-11, PW-40.1, PW-52, PFT-11.4, Nondestructive
Examination of Butt Welds (2010 Edition)
Date Issued: July 18, 2011
File No.: 11-557
Question (1): Do the UT acceptance/rejection criteria of
PW-52.3.1 and PW-52.3.2 apply only to those butt welds
identified in PW-11 and Table PW-11?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Section I classify weld joints meeting the
requirements of PFT-11.4 as butt joints?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Does Section I have rules establishing when a
visual examination such as that mentioned in
PW-40.1 is to be performed?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): Does Section I classify the hydrostatic test
required by PG-99 as a nondestructive examination?
Reply (4): No.
-
7/30/2019 BPVC I Interp Stnd 62 2012 Jul
3/3
Interpretation: I-10-28
Subject: PG-109 and PG-112.2.5, Certification and Stamping of
Power Piping (2010 Edition)
Date Issued: November 17, 2011
File No.: 11-1961
Background: Portions of a pressure piping system were shop
fabricated and documented on P-4A Manufacturers
Data Report for Fabricated Piping. A portion of the pressure
piping system had been field installed by one certificate
holder. A second certificate holder completed the installation
of the piping system.
Question (1): For the scenario above, if the first certificate
holder has certified his work on a P-4A
Manufacturers Data Report, may the second certificate holder
issue a P-4A Manufacturers Data Report,
referencing the P-4A forms from the first certificate holder and
the P-4A forms for the shop fabrication, certifying
the pressure piping system and apply the Certification Mark to
the piping system?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the scenario above, if the first certificate
holder has not certified his work on a P-4AManufacturers Data
Report, may the Authorized Inspector for the first certificate
holder issue a P-4A certifying the
certificate holders work?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): For the scenario above, if the first certificate
holder has not certified his work on a P-4A
Manufacturers Data Report, may the second certificate holder
issue a P-4A Manufacturers Data Report,
referencing the P-4A forms for the shop fabrication, certifying
the pressure piping system and apply the Certification
Mark to the piping system?
Reply (3): No.
