Asme Section Viii, Division 1 Interpretations

ASME SECTION VIII, DIVISION 1 INTERPRETATIONS
NOTE: THESE INTERPRETATIONS ARE FOR ASME COMMITTEE USE ONLY.

THEY ARE NOT TO BE DUPLICATED OR USED FOR OTHER THAN ASME
COMMITTEE BUSINESS.
WARNING: THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN

THIS DOCUMENT. PLEASE REVIEW THE ACTUAL INTERPRETATION FOR THE
EXACT WORDING.
TO GET A PRINTED COPY OF AN INTERPRETATION, FIRST HIGHLIGHT

THE PORTION DESIRED, THEN GOTO File ON THE TOOLBAR, THEN Print... ,
THEN HIGHLIGHT THE DOT AT THE (Selection BUTTON, FINALLY PRESS THE
OK BUTTON. BE CAREFUL NOT TO PRINT THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT.
Interpretation: VIII-77-01
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)(3)
Date Issued: January 7, 1977
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to U-1(c)(3) as
it relates-to the manufacture and stamping of compressor casings?
Reply: The Scope of the present Code and the laws and regulations of some jurisdictions exclude
rotating equipment under their definition of pressure vessels. The rules in Section VIII, Division 1 as
presently written, may not be complete for the pressure retaining parts of such objects.
If a Code "U" symbol is desired, particular attention should be given to the requirements
of UG-22. It may be necessary to apply the provisions of U-2(g) or UG-101.
In accordance with U-1(1) such objects may be stamped with the Code "U" symbol
provided that all requirements are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-51(a)(3)
File: NA
Question: With reference to UW-51(a)(3) is it permissible to qualify radiographic personnel in

accordance with SNT-TC-1A by means of certification by an outside organization, such as the Canadian
Government Standards Board?
Reply: It is not the intent of UW-51(a)(3) to permit qualification of radiographic personnel by

anyone other than the Manufacturer of the vessel involved. This would not preclude testing of
radiographic personnel by an outside agency such as that which you have described as long as the vessel
Manufacturer takes the final responsibility for certifying his personnel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UNF-58
File: NA
Question 1: Does UNF-58(c) apply to all welded joints and vessels, including those joining
nonpressure parts?
Reply 1: UNF-58(c) applies to all welds in vessels or vessel parts constructed of materials
conforming to the specifications listed.
Question 2: Is it intended that UNF-58(c) requires that all finished surfaces of welds not required to
be radiographed be examined by the liquid penetrant method?
Reply 2: Affirmative.
Question 3: What are the provisions of UNF-58(a) and (b) with regard to the types of joints and
method of liquid penetrant examination of all finished surfaces of welds?
Reply 3: It is intended that UNF-58(a) and (b) apply to all joints in vessels constructed of the
materials described in those paragraphs and the method of liquid penetrant examination is such that all
finished surfaces of welds are required to be examined.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(c)(5)(b), Table UG-84.1 and Table UG-84.2
File: NA
Question: Does the following meet the intent of the Code?

The material is SA-516, Grade 70 where the actual plate thickness is 0.262 in. The
minimum design temperature is -50 F and the Charpy impact specimen size is 10 x 5 mm. Since the
specimen width (0.197) is less than 80% of the actual plate thickness, what is the interpretation with
regard to the appropriate test temperature per Table UG-84.2 and with regard to the applicable Charpy V-
notch impact energy in foot-pounds per Table UG-84.1.
Reply: The provisions of the second sentence of UG-84(c)(5)(b) require that the test temperature
for the specimen in question is that which is adjusted by Table UG-84.2 for the temperature reduction
corresponding to the actual material thickness and the temperature reduction corresponding to the Charpy
specimen width actually tested. In this case the test temperature would be reduced by the temperature
reduction corresponding to the size of the specimen, 20 F, minus the temperature reduction
corresponding to the material thickness, 10 F, resulting in a temperature reduction of 10 F below the
minimum design temperature -50 F or a required test temperature of -60 F. The required energy in
foot-pounds from Table UG-84.1 is multiplied by 5/10 or the ratio of the actual specimen width along the
notch to the width of a full size specimen.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84 and Table UG-84.2
File: NA
Question 1: Table UG-84.2 refers to width along the notch. Is this dimension limited by test plate
thickness for subsize specimens?
Reply 1: The "width along the notch" dimension as indicated above is limited by the test plate
thickness for subsize specimens.
Question 2: In the title of Table UG-84.2 it indicates .when the subsize Charpy impact width is . . ." Is
the width referred to here specifically referring to the width along the notch?
Question 3: For materials of thickness less than 0.394 in., and when the width along the notch is at
least 80% of the plate material being tested, is the test temperature reduced below the minimum design
temperature by an amount indicated in Table UG-84.2?
Reply 3: We would refer you to the first sentence of UG-84(c)(5)(b) which indicates that the
Charpy tests of such a specimen shall be conducted at a temperature not warmer than the minimum design
temperature. Further, there is no requirement for reducing this temperature further.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SB-111, Copper Alloy 706
File: NA
Questions: Is light drawn tubing in accordance with SB-111, Alloy 706 acceptable for Section VIII,
Division 1 vessels? Are there problems in recognizing hard drawn tubing?
Replies: SB-111, Alloy 706, light drawn tubing is acceptable in Table UNF-23.2 of Section VIII,
Division 1. The Summer 1976 Addenda should have reflected this in the tabulation; however, this will be
corrected in the Winter 1976 Addenda in the Errata portion. With regard to hard drawn tubing, the
Committee has not received a user request for this material and, therefore, has not addressed its inclusion
in Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-23(b)
File: BC75-358
Question: How should UG-23(b) be interpreted with regard to its applicability to vessels having
stresses which would cause fibers to be in compression as well as in tension?
Reply: For vessels whose fibers are in tension as well as in compression, the vessel designer
must examine both the tension and compression sides individually to determine whether their algebraic
sum or difference does not exceed the maximum allowable stress value which by the rules of UG-23(b)
shall be the smaller of the value of maximum allowable stress in the tables of Subsection C or the value of
factor B.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11
Date Issued: February 4, 1977
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11(a) with regard to
the applicable requirements for Category D welds such as those shown in Fig. UW-16.1?
Reply: For vessels constructed under the provisions of full radiography in UW-11, UW-11(a)(5)
requires only that Category D butt welds be required to be radiographed for their full length. Such welds
are shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketches q-1, q-2, q-3, and q-4. This does not preclude the possibility of
having nozzle attachments by any of the other sketches shown in Fig. UW-16.1 where radiography would
not be a requirement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UHA-23, Use of SA-193 B8 Class 2 Bolts at Elevated
Temperatures
File: NA
Question: May SA-193 Grade B8, Class 2 bolts be used for temperatures higher than those listed in
Table UHA-23 with the same temperature and stress levels as Class 1 bolts? It is noted that at the
increased temperatures the Class 2 bolts are identical to the Class 1 bolts as they lose their increased yield
strength which was obtained at room temperature by strain hardening; also, that the Class 1 bolts are
inadequate for initial gasket seating forces but are adequate for service loads for flange configurations.
Reply: It is permissible to use the Class 2 bolts at elevated temperatures with the same
temperature and stress values as listed for the Class 1 bolts for SA-193, Grade B8 as described above.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-116 and AS-131
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation as to whether, under the provisions of Section VIII,
Division 1, the words "design pressure" may be used instead of "maximum allowable working pressure"
on the vessel nameplate? It is noted that this is different from Section VIII, Division 2 in Fig. AS-131.1
in this respect.
Reply: UG-116(a)(3) requires that the maximum allowable working pressure be stamped on the
nameplate. It is permissible to supplement this information with the design pressure on the nameplate if
so desired. The differences between Division 1 and Division 2 in this respect are intentional,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-25(a) and UG-46(f)(3)
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 relative to whether it is
required that an ammonia receiver manufactured to Section VIII, Division 1 have manholes in accordance
with UG-46(f)(3) where they are over 36 in. I.D.?
Reply: UG-25(a) indicates that the user or his designated agent has the responsibility to
determine whether or not the substance contained in a vessel is corrosive and, if there is no corrosion
allowance provided, this fact shall be indicated on the Manufacturer's Data Report (see U-2 for definition
of "user" or “designated agent").
If the substance contained in the vessel is determined as noncorrosive in accordance with
above, then UG-46(a) permits the omission of inspection openings described in that paragraph.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-93 and UG-11, Pipes Used as Nozzle Necks in Pressure
Vessels
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 as to whether pipe used as a
nozzle neck in a pressure vessel would be covered under UG-11?
Reply: Pipe used as a nozzle neck in a pressure vessel would not fall under the provisions of
UG-11 Miscellaneous Pressure Parts, but would be procured by the vessel Manufacturer as a material and
would be subject to the provisions of UG-93.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-13 and UG-93(d)(3)
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of UW-13(e) with regard to the liquid penetrant and
magnetic particle examination which is required per UG-93(d)(3)?
Reply: As defined in UG-34(b), the part designated ts is the actual thickness of the shell
exclusive of corrosion allowance and the vertical (thicker) member is the forged or rolled plate whose cut
edges shall be examined in accordance with UG-93(d)(3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56
File: NA
Question: Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1 to partly weld a nozzle-to-shell joint,
postweld heat treat to UCS-56, and then complete the weld without further postweld heat treatment?
Reply: It is not the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 to permit a weld to be only partially
completed prior to postweld heat treatment as indicated in your inquiry. The thickness of the shell plate
would be the controlling factor in any case under the provisions of UCS-56(d)(4).
(Refer to II-77-06, p. 171)
Subject: Section II, Part B and Section VIII, Division 1, SB-17 1, Grade CDA 706
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-44
File: NA
Question: Is it permissible for a vessel manufacturer to accept an ANSI B16.5 flange for use in a
Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel without further calculations or comparison with Appendix 2?
Reply: It is permissible for a vessel manufacturer to utilize an ANSI B16.5 flange in accordance
with UG-44 without further calculation or comparison to Appendix 2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-28(b) and UG-29(a)
File: NA
Question: Does the length L(2) as defined in UG-28(b) and Ls(2) as defined in UG-29(a) apply to
the length between circumferential connections to the shell of a dimpled jacket?
Reply: This construction would follow the rules of UW-19 which also requires that the dimpled
component is rated based on a proof test given in UG-101. The flat plate (inner shell) is calculated as a
braced and stayed plate. Consequently, the use of UG-28 and UG-29 would be inappropriate.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-20, Minimum Thickness of Tubes in a Shell-and-Tube-
Heat Exchanger
File: NA
Question: Are the minimum thickness requirements in UHA-20 applicable to the tubes in a shell-
and-tube heat exchanger?
Reply: The rules of UHA-20 relative to minimum thickness are not applicable to tubes in a shell-
and-tube heat exchanger provided the outer pipe or shell is constructed to the rules of Section VIII,
Division 1 including the minimum thickness requirements.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(c), Stress Reduction for Unstayed Covers
File: NA
Question: Is it required that the stress S for unstayed covers in UG-34 be reduced per UW-12(c) for
vessels that are neither fully radiographed nor spot radiographically examined?
Reply: The stress reduction of UW-12(c) applicable to design calculations for vessels that are
neither fully radiographed nor spot radiographically examined is not applicable to the stress S for
unstayed flat heads and covers in UG-34.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11(a)
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the applicable
material certification requirements for pipe nipples not exceeding 2 in. diameter and welding caps not
exceeding 5 in. diameter?
Reply: Welding caps appear to fall within the provisions of UG-11(a) and, as such, the materials
shall be those permitted under Section VIII, Division 1 or in an accepted standard (such as an American
National Standard) covering the particular type of pressure part. The marking required is that of the name
or trademark of the Manufacturer and such other markings as are required by the standard involved, such
as ANSI-B 16.9, Wrought Steel Butt Welding Fittings.
Under the rules applicable through the Summer 1976 Addenda, the pipe nipples shall
satisfy either: (1) UG-93(a), which requires a Certified Test Report or Certificate of Compliance as
provided for in the Material Specification. (However, the requirements of UG-93 will be significantly
reduced with the Winter 1976 Addenda, as indicated on the copy of the print of the applicable paragraph);
or, (2) UG-11(a).
However, since there is not an accepted standard covering pipe nipples, use of this
alternate would require that the nipples be made of a material permitted under Section VIII, Division 1
and that the requirements concerning the part Manufacturer's marking, identification, and written listing
must be satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-79, Cold Working and Heat Treatment of Flanged and
Dished Heads
File: NA
Question: What is the correct interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the heat
treatment required for a flanged and dished head which has been formed by cold working?
Reply: The requirements of UCS-79 require heat treatment per UCS-56 under the provisions
described.
We would caution that ASTM material specification designations may not always be
arbitrarily substituted for ASME designations since they are not always identical.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Scope
Date Issued: March 1, 1977
File: NA
Question: What is the interpretation of the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to a vessel
having an ordered inside diameter of 6.065 in. as opposed to 5.761 in.?
Reply: Vessels made of 6 in. standard pipe 6.065 in. I.D. (as ordered) fall under the Scope of
Section VIII, Division 1. Similarly if the ordered inside diameter is 5.761 in. this does not fall under the
Scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
File: NA
Question: May a material, which is acceptable for Section VIII use, be used without impact tests for
an operating temperature of -20 F?
Reply: UCS-66(c)(1) permits an approved material to be used at or above -20 F without impact
testing.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g) and UG-101
File: NA
Question: Where complete rules for design and construction are not given, must a proof test in
accordance with UG-101 always be performed or does conformance with U-2(g) permit acceptance
without such testing?
Reply: Proof testing in accordance with UG-101(a) is only required when the strength cannot be
computed with a satisfactory assurance of accuracy. The intent of the reference to U-2 in UG-101(a)(1) is
to call attention to that paragraph which permits construction to Section VIII, Division 1 when the rules
do not cover all details of design and construction. U-2(g) states that where complete details are not
given, it is intended that the manufacturer, subject to the approval of the Inspector, shall provide details of
design and construction which will be as safe as those provided by the rules. A proof test performed in
accordance with UG-101 is one method for accomplishing this. Alternative procedures, such as stress
analyses which demonstrate conformance with the design criteria used to develop the specific design rules
of Section VIII, Division 1, may be used subject to the approval of the Inspector. The Inspector's
acceptance is indicated by his signing of the Manufacturer's Data Report. The use of U-2(g) may be
noted under remarks on that form.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Allowable Stress Values for SA-240
File: BC75-630
Question 1: In Section VIII, Division 1, SA-240, TP316L is listed with a value at 400 F of 15.5 ksi.
Since this is the only value to change since the 1971 Edition, please verify that this value is correct.
Reply 1: This will advise that the value of 15.5 is the correct value.
Question 2: SA-240 TP316 is listed in Section VIII, Division 2 with a value of 17.2 ksi at 500 F
whereas in Section VIII, Division 1 the stress value for the same temperature is 17.9. Please advise if
there is a discrepancy.
Reply 2: This is to advise that the value in Section VIII, Division 2 for the subject material at
500 F should be 17.9 ksi, the same as in Section VIII, Division 1. We thank you for pointing this out
and this will be reflected in a future errata.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Certificate of Test for Welding Filler Metal
File: NA
Question 1: Must certified test reports be included with the purchase of SFA welding electrodes?
Reply 1: Certified test reports are not required for filler metals for Section VIII construction.
Testing of specific batches of electrodes is performed at the option and expense of the purchaser. Reports
may also be furnished, if requested.
Question 2: Does ASME recognize certain companies for the purpose of manufacturing certified
welding electrodes?
Reply 2: ASME does not recognize certain companies as approved manufacturers of filler metals.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW(a) and (b), Double Butt Weld
File: NA
Question: Must the reverse or first side of a GTAW process double butt weld be ground or prepared
or the second side of the weld as described in UW-37(a) if the process produces a first side weld of
radiographable quality?
Reply: The reverse side of double welded joints need not be prepared as per UW-37(a) if the
provisions of UW-37(b) are complied with. A properly deposited TIG weld will meet the requirements of
proper fusion and penetration, as well as freedom from impurities as stated in UW-37(b).
File: BC75-558
Question: Does a butt welded joint comply with UW-35 if (a) the joint has complete joint
penetration and complete fusion for the full length of the weld, and is free from undercuts, overlaps, and
abrupt ridges and valleys, and (b) the surface of the weld groove falls below the surface of the adjoining
plate in a smooth transition and exceeds minimum design thickness requirement for the material?
Reply: The rules of UW-35(a) indicate that the butt joint as described does not comply with the
intent of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11, UW-12, Partial Radiography
File: NA
Question 1: Do the service restrictions of UW-2(a) for lethal substances and UW-2(c) for unfired
steam boilers with design pressures exceeding 50 psi permit the use of partial radiography under UW-
11(a)(5)(b)?
Reply 1: For lethal substances, all butt welds in vessels are required to be examined
radiographically for their full length as prescribed in UW-11(a)(1) except as provided in UW-11(a)(4)
which permits no radiography for Categories B and C butt welds in nozzles and communicating chambers
that neither exceed 10 in. nominal pipe size nor 1-1/8 in. wall thickness.
Question 2: Does the term "fully radiographed" in UW-12(a) include the provisions for partial
radiography under UW-11(a)(5)(b)?
Question 3: In Table UCS-57, is partial radiography permitted for butt welded joints above the
nominal thicknesses listed in the table for the various P-Number and group number classifications?
Reply 3: Negative. [See also UW-11(a)(2)]
Question 4: Does UHA-33(b) require radiography for the full length without the use of partial
radiography for the butt welded joints in vessels of the various materials listed therein?
Question 5: In UHT-5(a) it refers to "complete radiographic examination" in accordance with UW-51.

Does this permit the use of partial radiography under UW-11(a)(5)(b)?
Reply 5: Negative. Complete radiographic examination requires this examination for 100% of the
length of the weld.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(c)
File: NA
Question: Under Section VIII, Division 1, UG-31, does the 20% stress reduction in UW-12(c) for
nonradiographed vessels apply to electric resistance welded pipe as shown in Table UCS-23?
Reply: UW-12(c) requires that ". . in all other design calculations . . ." 80% of the allowable
stress is required except as specified therein. If a vessel utilizes a resistance welded pipe as the shell of a
vessel, and there are arc or gas welded butt joints that are not radiographed, the stress reduction in UW-
12(c) applies.
File: NA
Question: May calculations be performed in lieu of proof testing to destruction to justify design
conditions of half-pipe coil jackets on a pressure vessel?
Reply: Refer to UG-101(a)(1). This indicates that proof tests to establish maximum allowable
working pressure are intended for those vessels or vessel parts where the strength cannot be computed
with a satisfactory assurance of accuracy. Therefore, if you are able to satisfy your Authorized Inspector
that your calculations satisfy this requirement, then proof testing would not be required.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85(b) and (d)
File: NA
Question: Is pipe, procured in accordance to a specification in Section II for use in nozzles in a

Code vessel, considered a standard pressure part under the provisions of UG-11 and exempted from the
provisions of UG-85 and UCS-85(b) under UCS-85(d)?
Reply: The pipe described in the question, where used in the fabrication of nozzles, would not be
covered under the provisions of UCS-85(d) where reference is made to standard items described in UG-
11. Therefore, this would require test specimens as described in UCS-85(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Use of SA-515 Material and Interpretation of UG-99
File: NA
Question 1: Is it permissible to use SA-515, Gr. 60 material in the ranges for which allowable stresses
are listed in Table UCS-23 without additional requirements in that temperature range?
Reply 1: It is permissible to use SA-515, Gr. 60 material as listed in Table UCS-23 in the
temperature ranges for which tabular values are listed. However, the designer of the vessel should be
aware that the Code represents minimum safety requirements and that he should consider any additional
design considerations that may exist for his particular application.
Question 2: Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-99(h) to stipulate that the hydrostatic test
shall be conducted at a temperature at or above 60 F?
Reply 2: The 60 F limitation under UG-99(h) is a recommendation only [see also footnote 1 to
subparagraph (h)]. Beyond this it is up to the vessel designer to take into account the nil ductility
transition temperature for the particular materials involved.
Question 3: What does the term "intermediate" mean in terms of the use of SA-515 material for
specific services?
Reply 3: In general, intermediate temperature service would be indicative of being at greater than
room temperature but at a temperature less than that where creep considerations would be a controlling
factor.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2
Date Issued: April 22, 1977
File: NA
Question: Is it permissible to use a tubesheet with a bolting flange that utilizes a weld detail similar
to that shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (d)?
Reply: Typical joint details that are applicable for tubesheets with a bolting figure are given in
Fig. UW-13.2, sketches (h) through (l). Sketch (d) is not an acceptable welding attachment with the
addition of a bolting flange since the weld dimensions are not adequate for the additional moment
imposed by the bolt load.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Nozzle Configuration
File: BC77-222
Question: In a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel, may a nozzle utilize an abrupt transition in outside
diameter?
Reply: A nozzle which utilizes an abrupt transition in outside diameter is not prohibited by the
rules of Section VIII, Division 1 providing all of the applicable requirements are met, paying particular
attention to “te” in UG-40 and Fig. UG-40, and complying with items such as the strength of attachment
welds in UG-41 and the minimum nozzle requirements for attachment welds in UW-16.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-80, Out-of-Roundness
Date Issued: April 22,1977
File: BC77-236
Question: Is it permissible to exceed the permissible out-of-roundness of cylindrical shells under

internal pressure as required by UG-80(a) if an analysis is made as a basis?
Reply: Under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, an analysis as described in the above
question is not permitted to circumvent the rules as presently written. U-2(g) permits analysis to be made
for those instances where rules do not exist in Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Nonmandatory Appendix A
File: BC73-467
Question 1: For welded only joints under Table UA-002 is it required that the "a" dimensions be 1.4t
in the absence of testing?
Reply 1: The requirement of 1.4t is not a mandatory requirement and provisions are made in the
Table to accommodate other designs, for example, type "b" permits a reliability factor of 0.55 for f r (no
test) for "welded only" joints t (a < 1.4t).
Question 2: Is tube or tubesheet hardness taken into account for the factor "fy" in UA-002?
Reply 2: Although it is recognized that hardness is a factor in tube-to-tubesheet design, it is

sensitive to the fabrication process used, and consequently, hardness values are generally difficult to
obtain with a degree of accuracy. For this reason, the rules in Appendix A are written to utilize data, such
as yield strength values, for the factor “fy”.
File: BC73-467
Question 1: For welded only joints under Table UA-002 is it required that the "a" dimension be 1.4t
in the absence of testing?
Reply 1: The requirement of 1.4t is not a mandatory requirement and provisions are made in the
Table to accommodate other designs; for example, type "b" permits a reliability factor of 0.55 for fr (no
test) for welded only joints t (a < 1.4t).
Question 2: In Table UA-002, is rolling required to be done prior to welding?
Reply 2: Regarding the rolling and welding sequence, Note 8 to Table UA-002 indicates that the
sequence used in the joint description does not necessarily indicate the order in which the rolling and
welding is performed.
Question 3: Figure UA-002 appears to show contact fits between the tube outside diameter and the
tube hole. This would seem to preclude "welded only" design. Do these sketches also represent types "a"
and "b" of Table UA-002?
Reply 3: Figure UA-002 is intended to be schematic only and not show all details such as grooves,
fits, etc. Your point is well taken, and the Committee will continue to study this point for possible
clarification.
Question 4: In the revised Fig. UA-002, the joints are indicates as "some acceptable." If this
Appendix is adopted as mandatory, would this limit the selections to the joints shown in the Figure?
Reply 4: Whether or not the Appendix is adopted as mandatory, the joints shown in Fig. UA-002
are not intended to be all-inclusive and would not preclude other similar acceptable joints.
File: BC73-467
Question 1: The limits of acceptability for rolled only joints in various material combinations seem
overly restrictive. We feel that these should be relaxed.
Reply 1: The values for acceptability for rolled only joints are based on available published data
which has been submitted to the Committee. If you have any further test results to contribute in order that
consideration can be given to your request, please forward same to our attention.
Question 2: The testing of tube-to-tubesheet joints is an added expense and is of little or no value
where previously established proprietary designs have proven to be adequate and reliable. Should this
additional testing be eliminated based on proprietary designs and experience?
Reply 2: If on the basis of experience you can provide the Committee with data or any other
technical basis for the elimination of additional testing as outlined in Appendix A, please forward same to
our attention.
Question 3: If Appendix A should become mandatory, would other designs, such as double
tubesheets, be precluded?
Reply 3: Should Appendix A become mandatory, other special designs beyond what is required in
Appendix A would not be precluded; however, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to review his
design with his Inspector.
File: BC73-467
Question 1: Is it necessary to achieve a 1.4t minimum weld size for all applications in Appendix A?
Reply 1: Appendix A, as revised by the Winter 1976 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1, gives
relief for welds of less than 1.4t minimum weld size and provides for the case when the weld is less than
1.0t in Table UA-002.
Question 2: For the thickness "t", as described in Question (1), on what basis is this thickness
determined?
Reply 2: The tube wall thickness is based on nominal dimensions which is in agreement with Code
practice. For example, see Fig. UW-16.1.
File: BC73-467
Question: In nonmandatory Appendix A to Section VIII, Division 1, is it necessary to achieve 1.4t

minimum weld size for all applications?
Reply: Appendix A, as revised by the Winter 1976 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1, gives
relief for welds of less than 1.4t minimum weld size and provides for the case when the weld is less than
1.0t in Table UA-002.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Radiography of Formed Heads
File: NA
Question: For cold formed heads to be used in Section VIII, Division 1 vessels and where
radiography of the weld seams in the head is required, what are the requirements for the appropriate
sequence of cold forming and radiography?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not contain any specific requirements pertaining to the
sequence of radiography and cold forming of heads required to be radiographed. Therefore, it is up to the
vessel manufacturer to use his judgment for such an application.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, Classification of Sterilizers
File: BC76-187
Question: What Code requirements apply to a sterilizer of 9 in. I.D. which generates steam for
internal use only and which is heated by a strip heater mounted on the outside?
Reply: Such a sterilizer is within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1. It could be built under
the provisions of U-1(j) as a "UM" vessel. The sterilizer is not an unfired steam boiler or a fired pressure
vessel, so the requirements of UW-2(c) or (d) are not mandatory.
However, we caution you that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the
construction. As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1, Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine
requirements that may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, Classification of Autoclaves
File: BC76-187
Question: What Code requirements apply to an autoclave of 6 in. I.D. which generates steam for
internal use only and which is heated by a strip heater mounted on the outside?
Reply: Such an autoclave is not within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 when the inside
diameter does not exceed 6 in. [See U-1(c)(9)]. However, if desired, such an autoclave could be
constructed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 rules [See U-1(i)]. The mandatory rules are not
influenced by the location of the heater. The autoclave is not an unfired steam boiler or a fired pressure
vessel, so the requirements of UW-2(c) or (d) are not mandatory.
construction. As indicated by footnote to U-1, Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, Classification of Autoclaves
File: BC76-518
Question: What is the applicable Code symbol to be applied to an autoclave which uses an electric
resistance heater to generate steam at no greater than 15 psig MAWP? (We assume that the steam is not
for use external to the autoclave and that the heaters transmit heat directly to the water and not through
the shell of the autoclave.)
Reply: Such an autoclave is not within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 when the pressure
does not exceed 15 psig [See U-1(c)(8)]. However, if desired, such an autoclave could be constructed in
accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 rules [See U-1(i)] . The autoclave is not an unfired steam boiler
or a fired pressure vessel, so the requirements of UW-2(c) or (d) are not mandatory.
File: BC77-262
Question: Are there any out-of-roundness tolerances for cylindrical shells subject to internal
pressure other than those found in UG-80(a) for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: The requirements of UG-80(a) are the only permissible out-of-roundness tolerances for
cylindrical shells under internal pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-6(b)(4), Dished Covers
File: BC77-94
Question: What is the appropriate sign convention to be used for "F" and "J" in UA-6(b)(4) and Fig.
UA-6(d)?
Reply: Positive values for both "F" and "J" are used in the flange thickness equation of UA-
6(b)(4)(b). This is caused by the value of "P" (see UG-98) and "MO" (see UA-50 and UA-55) used in the
equations always being positive values because they are actually the absolute values of the calculated
values for "P" and "MO". Of course, the calculated value of "MO" according to UA-6(a), could be either
positive or negative depending on the assumed sign convention. The reason for this use of "P" and "M O"
is that at some point on the ring cross-section, the Stresses caused by "P" and "MO" add whether the
pressure is internal or external.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Date of Compliance
File: BC77-237
Question: What determines the mandatory Code requirements to be used for the manufacture of
new pressure vessels?
Reply: The Foreword of Section VIII, Division 1 states that "After Code revisions are approved
by Council they may be used beginning with the date of issuance shown on the Addenda. Revisions
become mandatory as minimum requirements six months after such date of issuance, except for boilers or
pressure vessels contracted for prior to the end of the six-month period."
The applicable Code Edition and Addenda is to be recorded on the Manufacturer's Data
Report. For example, see Item 5 of the U-1 Form.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-34, Nomenclature
Date Issued: May 20, 1977
File: NA
Question: In the Winter 1976 Addenda the value of E as defined in the nomenclature for unstayed
flat heads and covers is as follows:
E = joint efficiency, from Table UW-12, of any Category A weld as defined in UW-3(a)(1)
Does this joint efficiency pertain to the efficiency of a welded joint within the head as would be present in
a flat head fabricated from two or more pieces, or is this joint efficiency applicable to any Category A
joint within the vessel?
Reply: The value of E as indicated above pertains to the joint efficiency to be used in a Category
A butt weld in the flat head or cover and not to any Category A joint in the vessel [see also UW-3(a)(1)]
Date Issued: May 27,1977
File: BC76-735
Question: May tubes conforming to the chemical and physical properties, heat treating, and melting
requirements of SA-249, Grades TP304N and TP316N, but otherwise conforming to the manufacturing
procedures, tolerances, test, and marking requirements of SA-688 be used under Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply: Yes. Such material may be used under the provisions of UG-15 of Section VIII, Division
1.
File: BC77-241
Question: Does a weld "coupon," consisting of two plates tack welded to the end of a vessel and
duplicating the longitudinal joint in that vessel for purposes of spot radiography, meet the intent of UW-
52(b)(1)?
Reply: UW-52(b)(1) permits one spot examination to represent identical vessels, individually of
less than 50 ft seam length under certain circumstances. The "coupon" described in the inquiry does not
meet the intent of UW-52(b)(1) in this regard.
File: BC77-265
Question: Why is the circumferential band for local postweld heat treatment considerably larger
under the provisions of UW-40(a)(5) for attachment welds than that shown under UW-40(a)(3) for
circumferential butt joints?
Reply: The requirement for the wider circumferential band is based on the need for assuring that
the nozzle and nozzle welds, being of a different geometry than the vessel shell, are able to reach the
specified heat treating temperature. This temperature is then maintained for a sufficient length of time to
achieve the appropriate stress relieving effect.
File: BC77-274
Question: When an integrally reinforced nozzle is inserted into a shell utilizing a full penetration
weld and cover weld in accordance with Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (g), what determines the dimensions of the
cover weld?
Reply: The dimensions of the cover weld, in the above described attachment, shall be
determined in accordance with Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (g) as described in the nomenclature for tc in UW-
16(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UA-51
Date Issued: June 21, 1977
File: BC77-255
Question: Under the provisions of Fig. UA-51.1, the values of T, U, Y, and Z pertain to the design
of flanges where Poisson's ratio is assumed to be 0.30. What are the values of T, U, Y, and Z to be used in
flange construction under Section VIII, Division 1 where Poisson's ratio is other than 0.30?
Reply: For the design of flanges where Poisson's ratio is other than 0.30, we would direct you to
the provisions of U-2(g). This covers the instance where a particular aspect of vessel design and
construction is not covered by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-5 1, Retention of Radiographs
File: BC77-282
Question: Under the provisions of UW-51(a)(2), is it required that radiographs which were judged
unacceptable by the Inspector be retained?
Reply: No. Only those radiographs which represent the final acceptable vessel welds are
required to be retained by the provisions of UW-51(a)(2) for a period of at least 5 years.
File: BC77-342
Question: May a defect on a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel shell be repaired by grinding to a point
below the required thickness of the vessel if an analysis is performed in accordance with Section VIII,
Division 2?
Reply: The rules prescribed in Section VIII, Division 1, UG-27 require that the thickness of the
vessel be no less than that computed by the formulas given in that paragraph. Therefore, repair by
grinding which causes the thickness to be less than that required by the rules of UG-27 is unacceptable.
File: BC77-296
Question: Is it permissible under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to apply an epoxy enamel
prior to the hydrostatic test of a completed vessel in accordance with UG-99?
Reply: The rules of Section VIII, Division 1 do not include rules covering epoxy enamel
coatings; however, application prior to hydrostatic test of a cast iron pressure vessel is not prohibited.
This intent has been established by the rules given in UG-99(l) and (m) for galvanized and lead lined
vessels.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Impact Testing for Carbon Steel Vessels
File: BC77-294
Question: What are the requirements for impact testing for carbon steel vessels such as those
manufactured of SA-515 or SA-455 material?
Reply: We would refer you to the requirements of UCS-66 for the requirements for impact
testing of materials conforming to the specifications tabulated in Table UCS-23, such as SA-515 and SA-
455. This paragraph has impact test requirements for temperatures below -20 F.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-9(c) and UW-13(a)
File: BC77-321
Question 1: What is the intent of UW-9(c) with regard to the provision of a tapered transition for
sections of different thickness?
Reply 1: The intent of UW-9(c) is that a tapered transition shall be provided in accordance with
Fig. UW-9 when the difference in thickness between the two sections is greater than 1/4 the thickness of
the thinner section or 1/8 in., whichever is less.
Question 2: In UW-13(a)(2),a tapered transition having a length not less than 3 times the offset is
described for head to shell joints as shown in Fig. UW-13.1. Is this offset obtained in a similar manner as
the dimension Y in Fig. UW-9?
Reply 2: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Case 1292-10 and U-2(d)
File: BC77-314
Question: In Case 1292-10, should the calculations for the plain plate used in an embossed or
dimpled assembly meet the requirements for braced and stayed surfaces?
Reply: The plain plate indicated in paragraph (1)(b) of the reply of Case 1292-10 shall meet the
requirements for braced and stayed surfaces in UG-47 and for welded stayed construction in UW-19. The
allowable working pressure for resistance welded embossed or dimpled assemblies in Case 1292-10 shall
be established by the weaker of that calculated value or a proof test in accordance with paragraph (1)(a) of
the reply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11(a)(4) and UW-2(a)
File: BC77-350
Question: Do the provisions of UW-11(a)(4) override the requirements of UW-2(a) for the
exemption of certain butt welds in nozzles where a vessel is in lethal service?
Reply: It is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that Category B and C butt welds in nozzles
and communicating chambers that neither exceed 10 in. nominal pipe size or 1-1/8 wall thickness are
excluded from the provisions of radiography, even though the vessel is in lethal service. This overrides
the provisions of UW-2(a).
File: BC77-335
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-116 of Section VIII, Division 1 to express
the units of pressure and temperature in metric units on the nameplate?
Reply: It is intended that the units on the nameplate be expressed in the customary English units,
and if metric units are needed, these can be inserted parenthetically next to the appropriate English unit.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11
Date Issued: July 1, 1977
File: BC77-295
Question: Does UW-11(a)(4) permit Category B and C butt welds to be nonradiographed under the
following circumstances of nominal pipe size and wall thickness?
Circumferential welded butt joints in nozzles and communicating chambers, not
exceeding 10 in. nominal pipe size, need not be radiographed, only if the wall thickness does not exceed
1-1/8 in.
Circumferential welded butt joints in nozzles and communicating chambers, not
exceeding 1-1/8 in. wall thickness, need not be radiographed only if the nominal pipe size does not
exceed 10 in.
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Nonmandatory Appendix A
File: BC77-315
Question: Note (5) to Table UA-002 in Nonmandatory Appendix A defines the term t as the
nominal thickness of the average wall tube. Why is this defined as nominal t rather than required t?
Reply: The Code assumes that the nominal t is to be used as the required t since the thickness is
based on the worst condition, that is, all of the components are designed on the basis of the balanced
strength rather than an individual component on the basis of minimum strength. This is consistent with
the philosophy set forth in the other rules of Section VIII, Division 1 such as that of UW-16 regarding
requirements for attachment welds.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix II, Fig. UA-48, sketch (1a)
File: BC77-325
Question: The note under Fig. UA-48, sketch (la) indicates "this weld may be machined to a corner
radius to suit standard lap joint flanges". There is a minimum dimension of 0.7c for the fillet weld in this
figure. Is it the intent that the 0.7c dimension apply prior to the machining of the corner radius indicated
in the note, that is, where this machining will cause the dimension of the fillet weld to be less than the
0.7c?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-36(b)
File: BC77-323
Question: Under the provisions of UCL-36(b) and UW-52(a), are the welds in a vessel of a
Specification SA-264, designed for external pressure and welded with austenitic chromium-nickel steel
filler metal, required to be spot radiographed?
Reply: The provisions of UCL-36(b) are applicable to chrome alloy cladding which has a quality
of air hardening and, as such, would not be applicable to SA-264 which is a chrome nickel high alloy
non-air hardening cladding. Therefore, such a vessel welded with austenitic chromium nickel steel filler
metal would not be required to be spot examined per UCL-36(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-101(d)
File: BC77-324
Question: Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1 that different casting materials used to
make heads of the same design and pressure rating may be proof tested by an individual proof test for the
various materials involved?
Reply: It is the intent of UG-101(d) that when different materials such as brass, stainless steel,
and cast iron are used to make parts for a particular design and pressure rating, individual proof tests shall
be carried out for each material used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79(b)
File: BC77-312
Question 1: Is dimpled construction made by a method where the dimples are punched and drawn
cold in a hydraulic actuated die set, permissible under UCS-79(b) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply 1: UCS-79(b) prohibits carbon and low alloy steel plates from being formed cold by blows.
The construction described in the question is not considered an operation of this type but more of a
pressing operation and therefore, is permissible under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question 2: Is proof testing in accordance with UG-101 required for a dimpled construction described
in Question 1?
Reply 2: Yes. Refer to UW-19(c)(2). As a matter of interest, there are three Code Cases which
cover dimpled construction for resistance welding, gas metal arc spot welding, and resistance welded
hydraulically formed panels. These are Cases 1292-10, 1376-8, and 1585-1, respectively.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-10 and Method of Rolling Plate for a Shell of a Vessel
Date Issued: August 8, 1977
File: BC77-343
Question 1: If a Material Manufacturer furnishes a plate to a Manufacturer of a vessel for Section

VIII, Division 1 Construction, and the plate has been sufficiently marked to identify the specification
number, is it necessary that the requirements of UG-10 be carried out for "Materials not fully identified"
if the Material Test Report or Certificate of Compliance has not been furnished?
Reply 1: If a material has been furnished in accordance with the above without the necessary
documentation, such as a Certified Material Test Report or Certificate of Compliance, it is only necessary
that the vessel Manufacturer obtain this documentation from the Material Manufacturer under the
guidance of his Authorized Inspector. Alternatively, the material might be qualified under the provisions
of UG-10.
Question 2: Is there any restriction in Section VIII, Division 1 as to whether a plate to be used in the
shell of the vessel must be rolled in the same direction as the shell is to be rolled?
Reply 2: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-25(d) and UCS-25
File: BC76-614
Question: What is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the corrosion allowance
required by UG-24 and UCS-25 relative to an air-oil separator reservoir manufactured for a rotary screw
air compressor. The vessel contains both air and oil. Does the term "compressed air" in UCS-25 apply?
Reply: The present wording of UCS-25 of Section VIII, Division 1 does not exempt vessels with
a required minimum thickness of 1/4 in., or less that are to be used, in compressed air service, or
containing compressed air and oil, from the corrosion allowance provision of this paragraph, unless the
following conditions are met:
(1) The vessels are designed in accordance with UW-12(c) of the Code; or
(2) The compressed air has had moisture removed to the degree that it has an atmospheric
dew point of -50 F.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(i)(3), Impact Test Requirements
File: BC77-338
Question 1: This concerns a single vessel requiring more than 400 ft of welding per weld procedure
and which has a wall thickness varying from 3/4 in. to 2 in. All welding will be done in the 1G position
and the welding is limited to joints of Categories A and B. Under the provisions of UG-84(i)(3)(a), is one
production impact test plate per weld procedure all that is required for a single vessel regardless of the
length of welding involved and variations in wall thickness?
Reply 1: Yes.
Question 2: UG-84(i)(3)(b) requires that for several vessels or parts of vessels welded within any 3
month period at one location, one test plate shall be made for each 400 ft of joints welded by the same
procedure provided the plate thickness does not vary by more than 1/4 in. or 25% and the same
specification and grade of material is used. Does this paragraph apply to a single vessel, either from the
aspect of the thickness limitation or the length of welded joints welded by the same procedure?
Reply 2: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UA-280
File: BC75-760
Question 1: In UA-280, what is the origin of the 0.7 factor applied to the allowable tensile stress in
the nozzle wall shear calculation?
Reply 1: The 0.7 factor is given in UG-45(b). The derivation of this factor can be found in earlier
Editions of the Code. The allowable stress in shear is taken as 80% of the allowable tensile stress and a
factor of 87.5% is applied for combined end and side loading. Therefore: 0.80 X 0.875 = 0.70
Question 2: In UA-280, in the calculation of (A) fillet weld shear why is (divided by 2 in this
equation? It appears that only 1/2 of the weld circumference is considered.
Reply 2: The example is intended to follow the rules given UG-41(c) and in particular the
sentence: "The strength of the attachment joint shall be considered for its entire length of each side of the
plane of the area of reinforcement defined in UG-40." This length, in Example 1 of UA-280, is " /2 X
nozzle O.D." The basis concept is that the forces in the vessel from one side of the plane must be
transmitted through the attachment joint and back to the vessel on the other side of the plane.
Question 3: In UA-280, in the calculation for (C) groove weld tension, why is tension considered in
the groove weld rather than shear? Unless the vessel is externally pressurized it would appear that the
principal loading of the weld is in the shear.
Reply 3: Conceptually, the vessel shell in the above example is trying to pull away from the
nozzle, thereby placing tension on the groove weld.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-39, UG-40. Section VIII, Division 2; AD-540.1
File: BC77-362
Question 1: In Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 what are the applicable paragraphs for the limits of
reinforcement for openings and flat heads?
Reply 1: UG-40 of Section VIII, Division 1 and AD-540 in Section VIII, Division 2 are the
applicable paragraphs for such openings.
Question 2: Under what conditions would a single opening in a Section VIII, Division 1vessel not
require reinforcement?
Reply 2: Refer to UG-36(c)(3) which outlines the conditions under which a single opening in a
vessel not subject to rapid fluctuations in pressure would not require reinforcement.
Question 3: UG-39(b) and UG-39(d) give different methods of providing for the total cross sectional
area of reinforcement in flat heads. Which is the required calculation?
Reply 3: The vessel designer has the option of using either UG-39(b) or (d) for such a calculation,
depending on which is most advantageous to him.
File: BC77-398
Question: What are the specific substances considered lethal under the service restrictions of UW-2
of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 provides a definition of lethal substance in the footnotes of UW-
2. A list of lethal substances is not provided since the responsibility for the determination of whether a
substance is lethal as defined by Section VIII, Division 1 rests with the user and/or his designated agent.
If such a substance is determined as lethal, the vessel Manufacturer shall be advised.
File: BC77-395
Question: Will the issue of the 1977 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1 affect the qualification of
Level III Radiographers qualified under the provisions of UW-51 by a Manufacturer's written statement
based on experience?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Impact Tests of Weld Metals
File: BC77-475
Question: Are impact tests required for weldments made with carbon steel base metal and E6013
electrodes below -20 F?
Reply: The requirements for impact testing of weldments are given in UCS-66 and particularly
in UG-84.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Material Certification
File: BC77-401
Question: Is it permissible for a vessel Manufacturer to certify, with evidence acceptable to the
Authorized Inspector, that a material he has purchased complies with an ASME material specification
acceptable for a vessel constructed under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided that the documentation including any supplementary work performed by
the vessel Manufacturer is available to the Authorized Inspector at the site or plant where the material it
covers is to be used by the vessel Manufacturer in Code construction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12 and UG-36
File: BC77-394
Question 1: In a vessel which has satisfied the requirements of UW-52 for spot radiography and
where it is desired to utilize a joint efficiency of 1.0 for the longitudinal seam in a two piece head, is it
necessary to radiograph the weld attaching the head to the shell along its entire length?
Reply 1: The provisions of UW-11(a)(5)(b) permit the use of partial radiography as described
therein for the use of column (a) of Table UW-12 for the joint efficiency involved. Assuming in this case
that the weld joint is Type No. 1, the joint efficiency would be 1.0.
Question 2: If the half apex angle of a reducer or cone is 30 deg., is it necessary to provide a
reinforcing ring in accordance with UG-36?
Reply 2: In accordance with UA-5(e), cone to cylinder junctions without a knuckle may be used
without reinforcing rings provided the design is based on a special analysis as described in that paragraph.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Manufacturer's Data Report Certification
Date Issued: September 6, 1977
File: BC77-446
Question: What is the intent of the date of inspection on the Manufacturer's Data Report Form in
the "Certificate of Shop Inspection" block for a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel?
Reply: The significance of the date as described in the question is that of the final inspection date
for the completed vessel. We are of the opinion that the intent of the Code as described above is
sufficiently clear not to warrant further revision.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report
File: BC77-495
Question: May the U-1 Data Report Forms existing prior to the issuance of the Winter 1976
Addenda to the 1974 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1 be used after July 1, 1977 for Code vessels?
Reply: Data Report Forms which are of the format and content of those existing prior to the
Winter 1976 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1 may be used after July 1, 1977 only for vessels
contracted for prior to July 1st, 1977.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Sequence of Radiography and Postweld Heat Treatment;
Section V, Required Penetrameters
File: BC77-419
Question 1: What is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the sequence of postweld
heat treatment and radiography?
Reply 1: Section VIII, Division 1 does not require a particular sequence of radiography and
postweld heat treatment except for straight chromium ferritic steels in UHA-33(b); however, the vessel
designer should examine the properties of the materials involved to determine whether or not radiography
would be necessary after postweld heat treatment.
Question 2: For radiographic examination in accordance with Section V, what are the requirements
for the manufacture of penetrameters?
Reply 2: Current requirements of Section V, Article 2, T-262.1 only recognize SE-142 as an

acceptable IQI design. At this time we know of no accepted method for comparing the sensitivities
obtained by the two types of IQI.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Postweld Heat Treatment of Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints
File: BC77-461
Question: Under what conditions may the postweld heat treatment be eliminated for tube-to-
tubesheet welds for a fixed tubesheet heat exchanger for a P No.-1 material designed for temperatures
below -20 F used for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: The exemptions from postweld heat treatment under the above conditions are contained
in UCS-66(c) and UCS-67(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11 and Section I, PG-11 vs Section III
File: BC77-368
Question: For welded parts (fittings), Section II Specifications SA-234, SA-403, and SA-420
include requirements for Code Stamping, Data Reports, Inspection, and mill test reports. These
requirements appear to conflict with the provisions of PG-11.3 and UG-11(c) of Section I and Section
VIII, Division 1, respectively. Are these specifications intended for Section I or Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply: Specifications SA-234, SA-403, and SA-420 are intended for Section III construction.
Section I and Section VIII, Division 1 use of parts in accordance with these Specifications is possible
provided that the base material is permitted under Section I and Section VIII rules and is so identified on
the Manufacturer's Partial Data Report. However, under the provisions of PG-11.3 and UG-11(c) the
corresponding ASTM material specification could be used since they are listed in an accepted standard
such as ANSI B16.9.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Requirements for Relief Devices, UG-125(h)
File: BC77-397
Question 1 and Reply 1: See Interpretation VIII-77-89, Question 1 and Reply 1.

Question 2: What rules apply to the set pressure and accumulation pressure for the facilities described
in Question 1?
Reply 2: The requirements concerning set pressures are defined in UG-134. The relief devices
must be sized to satisfy the accumulation pressure requirements of UG-125(c) or UG-125(c)(1).
Question 3: May control systems or instruments be substituted for the relief device described under
Question 1?
Reply 3: As stated in the Note under UG-125(h), such substitution is not permitted under the
present rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-129(c)
File: BC77-337
Question: Do the rules of UG-129(c) permit the additional required marking to be placed on the
rupture disk holder instead of the pressure relief valve?
Reply 1: No.
Question 2: Who is the "responsible manufacturer" referred to in UG-129(c)(2)?
Reply 2: The responsible manufacturer is the manufacturer who conducts the certification of
capacity tests of UG-127(a)(3)(b)(3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Requirements for Relief Devices
File: BC76-523
Question 1: Where the only source of overpressure is external to a pressure vessel and there is no risk
of exposure to fire or other source of external heat, does UG-125(h) permit a suitably set and sized relief
device to be installed between the source of external pressure and the vessel rather than directly on the
vessel?
Reply 1: Yes
Question 2: May intervening stop valves be installed between the relief device of Question 1 and the
pressure vessel?
Reply 2: In accordance with the provisions of UG-135(e)(2) and UA-354(b), such stop valves are
permitted subject to the acceptance by the legal jurisdiction as stated in UA-350.
Question 3: If a vessel has a source of overpressure internal to itself and was protected against that
source by a suitable set and sized relief device installed directly on the vessel, could the vessel be
protected against an external source of overpressure by another relief device installed as in Questions 1
and 2?
Reply 3: Yes, subject to the qualifying conditions regarding the stop valves given in Reply 2.
Question 4: If a manufacturer furnished to a user an assembly consisting of pressure vessels, piping,

stop valves, and instruments to perform a specific function such as removing moisture from a gas, who is
responsible for furnishing the relief devices under Questions 1, 2, and 3?
Reply 4: This is a contractual matter that probably cannot be resolved by reference to Code rules.
To assist in resolution of this question additional rules which may have some bearing are as follows:
(a) U-2(a) which defines certain responsibilities of the user or his designated agent.
(b) Footnote 2 to U-2(a) which appears to define designated agent so as to apply the manufacturer
of the assembly in Question 4.
(c) Footnote 31 to UG-125(a) which states, "Safety devices need not be provided by the vessel
manufacturer, but overpressure protection shall be provided prior to placing the vessel in service."
In the absence of any specific contractual reference to relief devices, it is our opinion that
the rules would intend, under the provisions of Footnote 2 of U-2(a), that the manufacturer of the
assembly would be responsible to furnish the relief device installed directly on the vessel under Question
3. Beyond this opinion, it is not believed that the Code rules can assist in this contractual matter.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Size and Volume Limits, U-1
File: BC76-615
Question 1: U-1(j) of Section VIII, Division 1 defines the volume and pressure limits for vessels
which may be marked with a "UM" symbol. U-1(j)(2) defines 1-1/2 cu ft in volume and 600 psi design
pressure as one of these limits. How is the 1-1/2 cu ft volume determined for the shell side of a shell and
tube heat exchanger?
Reply 1: Where the tube side is an independent pressure chamber as described in UG-19(a), the
volume of the shell side of a shell and tube heat exchanger is the total shell volume minus the volume
taken up by the tube side.
Where the shell can be thoroughly vented, filled, and drained, measuring a suitable liquid
drained from a filled shell is a method frequently used to prove the volume of an independent chamber.
Question 2: U-1(c)(9) excludes "vessels having an inside diameter not exceeding 6 in. (152 mm) with
no limitation on pressure" from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1. Would this exclusion apply to a
vessel in which two cylindrical shells having inside diameters less than 6 in. are connected by a pressure
containing header (housing) which has an inside dimension exceeding 6 in.?
Reply 2: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Formed Heads Furnished as a Part, UG-11(b) vs UG-77(c)
File: BC75-239
Question 1: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction there appears to be a possible conflict between
the requirements of UG-11(b) and UG-77(c).
When a head, wholly formed by forging or die forming, is furnished by a parts
manufacturer basically as material under the provisions of UG-11(b) including the required marking and
material identification, must the requirements of UG-77(c) concerning marking and material identification
also be satisfied?
Reply 1: No. Under the stated conditions, the requirements of UG-77(c) do not apply.
Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is negative, under what circumstances is UG-77(c) intended
to apply?
Reply 2: If, instead of purchasing the heads basically as materials under the provisions of UG-
11(b), the vessel manufacturer was contracting work to others under the provisions of U-2(b)(2), the
requirements of UG-77(c) would apply.
Date Issued: October 13, 1977
File: BC77-605
Question: The length of weld in a vessel is less than 50 ft.; however, one welding operator is to
weld the longitudinal seam and two welding operators are to weld each circumferential seam. Is one spot
examination acceptable to satisfy the requirements of UW-52?
Reply: Under the provisions of UW-52(b)(2), a spot examination must be made for the welding
of each welding operator or welder. The exception to this is a condition under which two or more welders
or welding operators make weld layers in a joint in which case one spot examination may represent this
work. This rule applies regardless of the fact that the total length of weld in the vessel may be less than
50 ft.
Subject: Use of SA-487 Class 4Q for Section VIII, Division 1 Construction
File: BC77-603
Question: May SA-487 Class 4Q be used for construction under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. This material is not presently listed in the appropriate table in Subsection C.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following was added as a clarification
and sent to the inquirer.
Clarification Issued: May 16, 1978
Question: May SA-487 Class 4Q be used for construction under Section VIII, Division 1, Part
UCS?
Reply: No; however, this material is presently listed as an approved material in Table UHT-23 in
Subsection C and may be used for Section VIII, Division 1 construction in conjunction with the rules of
Part UHT.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Multi-Platen Press
File: BC77-332
Question 1: The platens of a multi-platen, hydraulic press, such as used in the plywood and laminate
industries, are pressured with steam at 150 psig and subsequently cooled with water during each cycle of
operation. Do the platens constitute a pressure vessel under the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply 1: The manufacturer and the user of the multi-platen, hydraulic press described above,
should carefully review the definitions of U-1(c)(3) regarding rotating or reciprocating mechanical
devices in relation to the primary design considerations of your equipment. It appears that your
equipment may be excluded from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question 2: Can you furnish guidance on the design of such multi-platen presses and
recommendations on a manufacturing source?
Reply 2: No. Such guidance or recommendations is not in the scope of the Committee's activities.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116
File: BC77-564
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-116 of Section VIII, Division 1 to express
the units of pressure and temperature in metric units on the nameplate?
Reply: It is intended that the units on the nameplate be expressed in the customary English units,
and if metric units are needed, these can be inserted parenthetically next to the appropriate English unit.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1; Nameplate Stamping
File: BC74-185
Question: Where a pressure vessel has one independent Code pressure chamber and one
independent non-Code pressure chamber, is it permissible to mark the data for the non-Code chamber on
the same nameplate that carries the Code symbol and appropriate data for the Code chamber?
Reply: No. Under the provisions of UG-119 and UG-116(i), it is intended that only the design
data for those portions of the vessel which comply with Section VIII, Division 1 be included in the
nameplate having the Code symbol; however, it is recommended that manufacturers attach an additional
nameplate (or marking) without the Code symbol indicating the design data for the non-Code chamber.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UNF-91
Date Issued: November 7, 1977
File: BC77-528 and BC77-702
Question: What is the intent of UNF-91 with regard to the filler metal being of the same
composition as the base metal?
Reply: In this regard, filler metal would be of a material of alloy which has approximately the
same radiation absorption rate as the material being radiographed. The identical alloy, by chemical
analysis, is not necessarily required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(e)
File: BC77-527
Question: Is it the intent of U-1(e) that piping and valves subject to pressure, including those with
an inside diameter greater than 6 in. but beyond the geometric limits listed in that paragraph, are outside
the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC77-593
Question: Are material test reports required for SA-53 Grade A or B for construction under Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The provisions of UG-93(a)(2) allow for this material to be accepted without obtaining
material test reports from the manufacturer provided the pieces are marked in accordance with Section 20
under that specification. Further, the requirements of UG-93 and UG-94 shall be complied with.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56, P-No. 4 Materials
File: BC77-568
Question: Under Table UCS-56, P-No. 4 material, does Note (1)(c)(3) apply as an exemption for
castings of SA-217 Grade WC-6, if the percent maximum carbon is restricted to 0.15%?
Reply: No. The exemption from postweld heat treatment specified in Note (1)(c)(3) (See
Summer 1977 Addenda) applies to pipe or tubes. Postweld heat treatment is mandatory in all cases for
this material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Inspection Openings, UG-46
Date Issued: November 16,1977
File: BC76-734
Question 1: Do the UG-46 requirements for inspection openings apply to the shell of a fixed
tubesheet heat exchanger?
Reply 1: The shell of a fixed tubesheet heat exchanger not subject to internal corrosion on the shell
side need not be provided with inspection openings. We see no direct conflict in the UG-46(a)
requirement for marking the Manufacturer's Data Report "for noncorrosive service" for a vessel
containing a standard corrosion allowance such as required by TEMA.
Where the shell side fluid has the potential to cause internal corrosion of the shell, the
UG-46 requirements apply.
Question 2: May telltale holes in accordance with UG-25(e) be used in lieu of the inspection openings
required by UG-46 for fixed tubesheet heat exchangers subject to internal corrosion and having a
diameter in excess of 36 in.?
Reply 2: No. As required by UG-46(b), inspection openings meeting the requirements of UG-
46(f)(3) are required for such vessels.
Note: The Winter 1977 Addenda will contain a new UG-46(f)(7) "Flanged connection from
which piping, instruments, or similar attachments can be removed may be used in place of the required
inspection openings provided that:
(a) the connections are at least equal to the size of the required openings, and
(b) the connections are sized and located to afford at least an equal view of the interior as the
required inspection openings."
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-15(b)
File: BC77-676
Question 1: Are the values given in UW-15(b) regarding stress values for weld metal to be modified
further by the joint efficiencies given in UW-12?
Reply 1: No. The values given in UW-15(b) are applicable for calculations pertaining to
reinforcement as indicated in UG-41 and as set forth in the examples given in UA-280.
Question 2: Is the calculation using the values in UW-15(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 affected by
the use of a particular welding process which consequently would result in stress reductions for the values
of S in the applicable formulas?
Reply 2: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-119(a)
File: BC77-525
Question: Is it required that the nameplate on a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel be stamped
exactly as shown in Fig. UG-118, or may the information concerning the company name and location be
placed across the top of the nameplate and code stamp placed in the center?
Reply: UG-119(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 states that the arrangements shown in Fig. UG-118
shall be substantially complied with. It is our opinion that the arrangement indicated in the inquiry does
not satisfy this requirement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56
File: BC77-520
Question: Under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, may pock-marks, pits, or tears produced on
the surface of a carbon or low alloy steel vessel by the improper removal of a thermocouple or other
attachment subsequent to postweld heat treatment be repaired by welding without subsequent postweld
heat treatment after the completion of the repair if the vessel is in lethal service?
Reply: Yes, provided this complies with the Notes to Table UCS-56 for the P-Number material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(5)(b)
File: BC77-578
Question: Are the provisions of UW-11(a)(5)(b) for partial radiography applicable to individual
Category B and C butt welds, regardless of length?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Use of SA-182 Grade F6A
Date Issued: December 5,1977
File: BC77-750
Question: In Table UHA-23 SA-182 Grade F6 is listed; however, this material is not included in
Section II, Part A nor is it commercially available. May SA-182 Grade F6A be used for Section VIII,
Division 1 construction under the provisions of UG-15 using the allowable stresses for SA-479 Grade
410?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Policy on Certification of Materials
Date Issued: December 8, 1977
File: BC77-371
Question: Is it acceptable for a material supplier to transfer information from a Material

Manufacturer's Certification or Certificate of Compliance, under his letterhead, in lieu of furnishing a
copy of the Material Manufacturer's CMTR or Certificate of Compliance?
Reply: It is the intent of the Code that a material supplier shall not transcribe data certified by a
Material Manufacturer but shall furnish a copy of that certification, supplemented as necessary by
additional documents which certify the results of tests, examinations, repairs, or treatments required by
the basic Material Specification and performed by the material supplier.
File: BC77-628
Question: UCS-66(c)(1) indicates that no impact test is required on any material for use at
temperatures of -20 F and above. Would E-6013 electrodes fall within this category?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2; Type No. 1 Joints
File: BC77-758
Question: A weld with the following specifications is proposed to be used for Section VIII,
Division 1 or Section VIII, Division 2 construction as a Type No. 1 weld used in a Category B location:
(a) single side, vee groove weld with no access to back side;
(b) root pass made with TIG process with no gas backing or backing strip or back gouging on
back side;
(c) balance of weld completed with submerged-arc process or manual shielded metal arc process;
(d) no consumable insert used,
(e) material is carbon steel.
Does the above weld qualify as a Type No. 1 weld?
Reply: The above weld may qualify as a Type No. 1 weld provided the requirements of UW-35
in Section VIII, Division 1 and AF-220 in Section VIII, Division 2 are met. Verification of the contour of
the back side of the weld may necessitate radiographic examination.
File: NA
Question: Would it be permissible to have hot rolled carbon-steel bars to AISI No. 1018 tested to
ensure that it meets the chemical and mechanical requirements of SA-675, and then use it in place of
material to SA-675 for construction of unfired pressure vessels?
Reply: A material could be produced to some other specification and be qualified as an SA

material provided the Inspector is presented with evidence acceptable to him, including the specific
requirements of UG-10, Section VIII, Division 1, indicating that the material satisfies all requirements of
the Code approved specification.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-65
File: BC77-681
Question: UA-65(b)(1) indicates that "the maximum pore dimension shall be 20% of T, or 1/8 in.,
whichever is smaller, except that an isolate pore separated from an adjacent pore by 1 in. or more may be
30% of T or 1/4 in., whichever is less".
In the foregoing paragraph, do the words after "except" contradict the first part of the
paragraph?
Reply: No. The words after "except" in the above quoted paragraph override the first portion of
the paragraph in the instance where an isolated pore (separated from an adjacent pore by 1 in. or more)
exists.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52(b)
File: BC77-699
Question: UW-52(b)(2) indicates that "such additional spots as may be required shall be selected so
that an examination is made of the welding of each welding operator or welder." Do the words "such
additional spots" apply even though the length of linear welding in the vessel is less than 50 ft.?
Reply: Yes. The words "such additional spots" apply in the case where more than one welder or
welding operator performs on other than 2 or more layers of an individual joint, in which case an
examination must be made for each welder or welding operator, regardless of the fact that the length of
linear weld may be less than 50 ft. This is an additional requirement to that specified in UW-52(b)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Code Case 1348, Use of ASTM A 494-62
File: BC77-724
Question: Code Case 1348 indicates in Par. (3) of the Reply that no welding is permitted. Is repair
by welding of castings conforming to ASTM A 494-62 permissible under the provisions of this Case?
Reply: Repair by welding of castings conforming to ASTM A494-62 under the provisions of
Case 1348 are only permissible in connection with compliance with the material specification, not in the
vessel fabrication.
File: BC77-573
Question: Under footnote 33 to UG-126, 1977 Edition, is it correct to refer to "static pressure" when
characterizing the opening or pop action of a safety valve?
Reply: Yes. The term "static pressure" is that pressure which tends to exert force on the walls of
a pressure vessel and actuates the safety valve as prescribed in UG-134.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11 and UG-15
File: BC77-602
Question: May nozzles be furnished by one fabricator to a manufacturer of a completed vessel out
of SB-265 plate which is to be rolled and welded without filler metal?
Reply: Such nozzles may be furnished for a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel as described in the
question under one of the following options:
(1) The nozzle could be furnished as a pressure part, requiring compliance with the applicable
material certification rules and Partial Data Report; or
(2) The nozzle could be furnished as SB-337 pipe for the same welded grade (note that the
chemical and mechanical properties are essentially the same); or
(3) The nozzle could be furnished under the provisions of UG-11(c) as a manufacturer's standard
in which case all of the rules in UG-11 as applicable to this construction shall be met, including
establishing a pressure-temperature rating.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-37(f)
File: BC77-626
Question: UW-37(f) requires markings for welders and welding operators for vessels in which the
wall thickness is less than 1/4 in. for steel material by a stencil or other surface marking unless a record is
kept by the manufacturer. May these markings be eradicated after the application of the Code symbol?
Reply: Yes, provided the Manufacturer's Data Report has been completed.
File: BC77-627
Question: Please verify that the following statements are correct with regard to interpretation of
UW-3:
(1) UW-3(a) weld Categories define the location of a joint, but not the type of joint.
(2) Category C merely locates the joint. This Category includes all types of flange to nozzle neck
connections.
(3) The butt welded joint connecting a welding neck flange to a nozzle neck is classified as
Category C and not Category B, although both are circumferential butt welded joints in a nozzle
(4) An intermediate circumferential butt weld joining two lengths of pipe in a nozzle neck, such
as may be found in a drain line, is classified as Category B.
(5) The weld categories do not describe the type of joint as indicated in Table UW-12.
(6) The weld categories do not define the nondestructive examination requirements.
(7) The requirements for the type of weld joint and nondestructive examination are dependent on
design and service considerations and are specified elsewhere in the Code.
(8) UW-11(b) and Note: All Category B and C butt welds in nozzle necks, including those
exempted on the basis of size from full radiography in UW-11(a)(4) or partial radiography in UW-
11(a)(5)(b), shall at least be examined by spot radiography according to UW-52. The frequency of the
spot examinations is defined in UW-52(b).
Reply: We agree with the above interpretations of UW-3.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(d)(2)
Date Issued: January 16,1978
File: BC77-753
Question: An evaporator or condenser has a water side comprised of heads and tubes, which
represent an independent pressure chamber of a multiple chamber vessel. Does the 120 gal limitation of
U-1(c)(6) apply to the sum of the volumes of the tubes and heads?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-101, Proof Testing
File: BC77-756
Question: Under the formulas of UG-101, proof testing, the formulas to compute the maximum
allowable working pressure of the vessel are reduced based on the ratio of the specified minimum yield or
tensile strength over the actual average strength from test specimens. On what basis is the maximum
allowable working pressure reduced by this ratio?
Reply: Although the actual average strength from test specimens as specified in the inquiry may
be greater than the specified minimum strength required by the materials specification, the proof test in
UG-101 are utilized for duplicate parts of the same materials, design, and construction which need not be
proof tested but only given a hydrostatic test or pneumatic test as described in UG-101(d). Accordingly,
these duplicate parts may have average actual strength from test specimens which may be close to the
specified minimum and below that determined by the specimens in the proof test procedure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11(c), Manhole Rings
File: BC77-757
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-11(c) to manufacture a manhole ring for use
in a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel without forwarding the U-2 Partial Data Report Form if the ring is
marked with the welder's identification symbol, trademark of the fabricator, and the material
identification number?
Reply: Under the provision of UG-11(c)(2), such a part may be fabricated in accordance with a
manufacturer standard provided all of the requirements of UG-11(c)(2) are met, including compliance
with the requirements of UW-26 through UW-40 and marking as required by UG-11(a)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-186, Design of Supports
File: BC77-775
Question: Is it the intent of Appendix G that the Manual for Steel Construction issued by the
American Institute of Steel Construction is to be used for the design of leg supports for tanks, including
the allowable stresses permitted by that document?
Reply: The above Publication as referenced in the first paragraph of UA-186 is only suggested as
good practice for the design of supports for pressure vessels. There may be other criteria that may need to
be used when the considerations as outlined in the other paragraphs of Appendix G are considered. We
regret that we cannot further comment on the specifics of the allowable stresses given in the Manual for
Steel Construction for the reasons which are given in UA-185.
Subject: Section III, Division 1, UG-36 and U-2(g)
File: BC77-594
Question: Is it permissible to design an end closure for a full diameter of a vessel where the inner
surface exposed to pressure is concave and where this end closure has an opening in the center?
Reply: Yes, it is permissible to design a vessel with the end closure equal to the full vessel
diameter. Some acceptable closures with full-open, flat ends are shown in Fig. UG-34 and other types are
described in UG-35.
Except for UG-38 for flued openings and UG-39 for flat heads, the opening rules of UG-
36 through UG-41 apply.
The design of the full-open closure would be required to comply with the requirements of
U-2(g) since the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 do not specifically cover this design detail and
geometry.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)(3) and U-1(i)
File: BC77-722
Question: May hydraulic cylinders, pneumatic cylinders, rams, and similar equipment be stamped
with the Code U-Symbol, provided all the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 are met?
Reply: The provisions of U-1(c)(3) exempt such vessels from the scope of Section VIII, Division
1 However, U-1(i) permits such pressure vessels which meet all of the requirements of the Code to be
stamped even though exempted from such stamping. Therefore, it is permissible to stamp the equipment
described in the question with the Code "U" Symbol. We would like to caution you that the designer
must be aware of the loading to consider under UG-22 and, where necessary, follow the provisions of U-
2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66, UG-118 and UG-119
File: BC77-572
Question (1): What are the requirements with regard to steel stamping directly on a pressure vessel
stamped in accordance with UG-118?
Reply (1): The provisions in UG-119(a) require nameplates bearing the marking called for in UG-
116 on vessels constructed for steel plates less than 1/4 in. or of nonferrous plates less than 1/2 in.
Question (2): Under UCS-66(c)(1), what is the intent of the Code regarding the exemption from impact
testing for vessels that may operate below -20 F due to a lower seasonal atmospheric temperature?
Reply (2): As is noted in UG-20, Design Temperature, atmospheric temperature is not included as a
factor in the establishment of operating conditions. It is the responsibility of the user to exercise
engineering judgment in the selection of materials for designs where the vessel may be in service
temperature. This was incorporated into the Code in recognition that there are a great number of vessels
having reduced pressures at such low temperatures and this exemption would avoid the imposition of an
unnecessary penalty.
File: BC77-807
Question: Is it permissible to use ASTM A621 under Case 1292 and Case 1376 for dimpled
embossed assemblies if the material is proven to meet the requirement of SA-414 which is listed in
Subsection C of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: It is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that material for Code use be ordered,
produced, and documented to an SA Specification; however, material produced to some other
specification could qualify as an SA material provided the Inspector is presented with evidence acceptable
to him, including the specific requirements of the UG-10, indicating that the material satisfies all the
requirements of the Code approved Specification.
File: BC77-782
Question: What is the intent of the permissible tolerance in UG-81(a) relative to the theoretical
shape of the head?
Reply: The tolerance permitted in UG-81(a) refers to a deviation from the specified shape of the
head outside of the theoretical shape of the head.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Signature on Manufacturer's Data Report by Manufacturer
File: BC77-855
Question: Is a handwritten signature of the Manufacturer or his designee required in the Certificate
of Compliance block on the Manufacturers' Data Report Form for Code construction under Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC77-725
Question: What are the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 regarding the rating and
application of the Code Symbol Stamp to liquid relief valves?
Reply: Paragraph UG-129(e) prescribes the appropriate marking for liquid relief valves;
however, the application of the Code Symbol Stamp is not required. Section VIII, Division 1 does not
discuss the method of rating liquid relief valves. Appendix XI for capacity conversion addresses itself to
compressible fluids and does not cover liquid conversions.
It is permissible to apply a Code Symbol Stamp to a safety relief valve in accordance
with UC-129 for air or steam service and add additional information for liquid service.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2 and UCS-56
File: BC77-805
Question: For heat exchanger parts of P-No. 1 material is postweld heat treatment required if the
vessel is operating in nonlethal service?
Reply: Such heat exchanger parts would be required to be postweld heat treated under the
conditions given in Table UCS-56 below that specified in Note (2)(a) and Note (3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Alloy 303
File: BC77-854
Question: Is Grade 303 stainless steel acceptable for use in vessels manufactured under Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. Grade 303 stainless steel is a free machining steel which has certain elements which
have been added making the material undesirable for use in pressure boundary applications, and for this
reason it has been previously rejected.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-34
File: BC78-1
Question: Are the requirements of UHA-34 for liquid penetrant examination applicable to butt and
fillet welds used in the fabrication of stiffening rings of vessels under external pressure?
Reply: No. We would also refer you to UG-30(b) for the requirements for the welds attaching
stiffening rings to shell plates.
File: BC77-583
Question: For use as heat exchanger tubes under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, is it
acceptable to fabricate tubes by forming a nickel plate or strip conforming to SB-162 into tubular shape
and welding using electron beam welding?
Reply: In accordance with the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-15, welded nickel
tubular products may be furnished as material when ordered to the applicable requirements of an
approved specification, such as SB-517, except that the chemical and mechanical properties shall conform
to the requirements of an approved material such as SB-162. The order for such a tubular product must
clarify the matter of required finishing treatment so that the finished product will conform to the
mechanical properties specified in the plate specification and listed in Table UNF-23.3 of Section VIII,
Division 1. Note that a factor of 0.85 must be applied to the allowable stress values listed for plate
material.
Electron beam welding is acceptable under the requirements of SB-517 and Section VIII,
Division 1.
File: BC78-2
Question (1): Do the rules of UG-47 which are applicable to staybolts also apply to reinforcing
rectangular bars used to reinforce flat plates used in rectangular vessels?
Reply (1): No. Section VIII, Division 1 does not contain specific rules to cover such reinforcing bars
and, therefore, the rules of U-2(g) apply.
Question (2): Are there any recommended procedures for the reinforcement of rectangular vessels of
flat plates?
Reply (2): No. See answer to question (1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56(d)(4)
File: BC77-860
Question: Under UCS-56(d)(4) it is indicated that, with the exception of Fig. UW-16.1, sketches (a)
and (b), the criteria for establishing the thickness to be used in applying the requirements for postweld
heat treatment is the thickness of the shell or head plate in nozzle attachment welds. May the ordered
thickness be used for establishing this criteria?
Reply: Yes. See also UG-16(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-125(e)
Date Issued: February 15,1978
File: BC76-201
Question: May a pressure gage used to determine the vessel pressure at or near the set pressure as
prescribed in UG-125(e) be omitted and an alternate gage be used to determine operating conditions
which is appropriately graduated?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Clamp Connections
File: BC78-28
Question: Is it permissible to use a clamp connection consisting of two flanged ferrules and a
molded gasket which fits into a grooved ferrule lip facing on the interior of the clamp device for Section
VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: The devices covered by your inquiry are not prohibited by the rules of the Code. When
the device is used within the boundary of the vessels, as complying with the Code, the devices must be of
Code material and the design pressure must be established by an analysis under U-2(g) or by proof testing
under UG-101.
When the device is used in conjunction with a closure providing access to a vessel,
further requirements of UG-35 shall be satisfied. Suppliers of these types of devices have demonstrated
capability to meet all of the Code rules and devices of the type covered by your inquiry have been
incorporated in vessels stamped with the Code Stamp.
File: BC78-54
Question: Is it permissible to attach a vessel nameplate by the use of a high temperature adhesive?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 specifies in UG-119(c) that the required nameplate shall be
permanently attached by suitable means to the vessel in a conspicuous place. The adhesive material
described in the question is not prohibited as a means to satisfy this requirement. It is the responsibility
of the vessel Manufacturer to determine that this adhesive would be able to withstand the conditions that
the vessel might see in service. If the nameplate does not directly adhere to the shell of the vessel, this
may not be a problem.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-56
File: BC77-790
Question (1): What are the requirements for preheat and postweld heat treatment for Section VIII,
Division 1 construction under the following conditions: vessel wall material P-No. 1; wall thickness 1-1/2
in.; attachment utilizes a throat thickness of 1/2 in. for attaching a nonpressure part to pressure part; no
service restrictions per UW-2; and postweld heat treatment is not a requirement per UCS-67.
Reply (1): Assuming that the vessel has no other welding than that attaching the nonpressure part as
described in the above question, postweld heat treatment is not a requirement; however, preheat to a
minimum temperature of 200 F is required as indicated in the Notes in Table UCS-56.
Question (2): Same as Question (1) except that the wall thickness is greater than 1-1/2 in.
Reply (2): Same as the Reply (1) again assuming that the vessel has no other welding than that
described in the question.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Overpressure Protection, UG-125
File: BC75-60
Question (1): Is it permissible to operate a vessel at a pressure exceeding the design pressure if the
design pressure and maximum allowable working pressure are assumed as equal?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does the inclusion of an overpressure margin for a pressure relief device setting as
permitted by UG-125 permit operation of a vessel at a pressure exceeding the vessel design pressure?
Reply (2): No.

File: BC78-29
Question: A tube to be used in a shell and tube heat exchanger is exempt from Charpy V-notch
testing since it would have a maximum obtainable Charpy specimen with a width along the notch of less
than 0.099 in. Table UG-84.3 indicates that SA-334 is the appropriate specification for impact tested
materials in tubular form. If the design temperature of the vessel is below -20 F, is it necessary that
SA-334 be used for tubes in such a vessel?
Reply: No.
File: BC78-37
Question: Is it the intent of sketch (3) of Fig. UA-48 that it is permissible to attach a hubless flange
to the outside diameter of a shell of a vessel with a fillet weld shown by the dotted lines in that sketch?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56(d)(2) and Fig. UW-13.1, Sketch (f)
File: BC78-79
Question: What is the intent of UCS-56(d)(2) with regard to the thickness to be used in applying the
requirements for postweld heat treatment in Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (f)?
Reply: It is the intent that the governing thickness in Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (f) would be the
greatest of the dimensions ts1, ts2 or th
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Use of SA-53 Type F Pipe
File: BC78-80
Question: Is it permissible to use SA-53 Type F pipe for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: No. SA-53 Type F is presently not listed in the tables of Subsection C with appropriate
stress values. (See UG-8.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-20(b) and UG-10
File: BC78-81
Question (1): Is it permissible to use SA-453 Gr. 651 Bolting at 1200 F for Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply (1): No. See UG-20(b).
Question (2): Under UG-10, is it permissible to use a material for Section VIII, Division 1 construction
if it is not identified with a specification number as listed in Subsection C if it is proven to meet the
requirements of an ASME Specification listed in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): It is the intent of the Code that materials for Code use should be ordered, produced, and
documented to an SA Specification; however, material produced to an ASTM Specification may be used
in place of an ASME Material Specification provided the requirements of the ASTM Specification are
shown to be identical or more stringent than the ASME Specification, or that the ASTM Specification is
certified to meet all the basic requirements of the ASME Specification.
In reply to the question, a material could be produced to some other specification and be
qualified as an SA material provided the Inspector is presented with evidence acceptable to him, including
the specific requirements of UG-10, indicating that the material satisfies all requirements of the Code
approved specification.
File: None
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-94 that each piece of plate or sheet be
marked as required by the applicable Material Specification prior to fabrication of the vessel?
Reply: It is the intent of UG-94 that each piece of plate or sheet be marked in accordance with
the requirements of the applicable Material Specification in Section II. If the material is subject to the
requirements of SA-20 or SA-414, for example, these specifications require that each piece be marked by
the Material Manufacturer.
File: None
Question: What are the requirements of UG-90(b)(6) and (b)(12) relative to the examination of
materials before fabrication" and "parts prior to joining" as applicable to the vessel Manufacturer and
Inspector?
Reply: It is the intent of UG-90(b)(6) and (b)(12) that the vessel Manufacturer establish a system
of control which provides that each piece of material and each part is so examined and that this system is
acceptable to the Inspector. This examination may be done by the Manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SA-240 Grade 304 and UG-15
File: BC78-51
Question (1): In Table UHA-23, Note (11) referenced by SA-240 Grade 304, indicates that for
temperatures above 1000 F the stress values can be used provided heat treatment is carried out as
specified. Does this heat treatment apply to the material prior to welding rather than postweld heat
treatment?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to use Type 304H material under Section VIII, Division 1 and if so what
are the maximum allowable stress values permitted?
Reply (2): Type 304H is presently not listed in Table UHA-23 in the product form of plate;
however, under the provisions of UG-15 this may be used as specified in that paragraph. Accordingly,
the maximum allowable stress values shown for Type 304H may be used.
File: BC78-48
Question: Is an oil reclaimer which encloses a compressor and is built as an integral part of an air
compressor considered to be within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: It would appear that these are excluded from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 by U-
1(c)(3).
We would call you attention to footnote 1 under U-1 which indicates that the legal requirements
of the various jurisdictions should be reviewed as they may have different or more restrictive limitations
than those prescribed by the Code.
File: BC77-790
Question (1): Is it the intent of UCS-56(d)(6) and Note (2)(a) to Table UCS-56 that the exemption from
postweld heat for material 1-1/2 in. and less, provided preheat over 1-1/4 in. is employed, applies to the
thickness of the weld attaching a nonpressure part to a pressure part?
Reply (1): No. The reference to 1-1/2 in. as described in the above question applies to the thickness
of the pressure part and not to the thickness of the weld. The provisions of UCS-56(d)(6) which refer to
the thickness of the weld at the point of attachment when a nonpressure part is welded to a pressure part
are applicable to the minimum time at normal temperature for nominal thickness if the weld requires
postweld heat treatment.
Question (2): Which of the following statements regarding fillet weld size and exemption from
postweld heat treatment where nonpressure parts are attached to pressure parts is correct?
(a) Fillet welds with a throat greater than 1/2 in. require postweld heat treatment when the
thickness of the pressure part exceeds 1-1/4 in. and preheat is not used.
(b) Fillet welds with a throat less than 1/2 in. need not be postweld heat treated if preheat is used
when the pressure part exceeds 1-1/4 in.
(c) Fillet welds with a throat less than 1/2 in. need not be postweld heat treated regardless of the
thickness of the pressure part or the fact that preheat is not applied.
Reply (2): Items (a) and (b) are correct statements. Item (c) is incorrect.
Question (3): Do the exemptions in Notes (3)(a), (b), and (c) apply only if postweld heat treatment is
required by UW-2?
Reply (3): No. The exemption in these Notes apply in any instance where a mandatory heat
treatment was required.
File: BC78-82
Question: Is it the intent of UG-45(a) that a sump or similar appurtenance when attached to a vessel
conform to the requirements of this paragraph?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-33 and UW-51
File: BC78-136
Question (1): Is it permissible to exceed the permissible alignment tolerances of UW-33 if the out-of
roundness tolerances of the shell or head to be joined are not exceeded?
Reply (1): No. The alignment tolerances of UW-33 shall be met under all circumstances.
Question (2): Section VIII, Division 1, UW-51 and Appendix IV do not specify any volumetric criteria
for slag inclusions. Is it correct that volumetric considerations are not applicable for acceptance-rejection
criteria?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): A radiographic examination in accordance with UW-51 discloses three parallel lines of
slag inclusions. If each line does not exceed the length limitations in UW-51(b)(3), is this acceptable
under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): In UW-51(b)(3) a group of slag inclusions in line are acceptable if the distance between
successive imperfections exceeds 6L where L is the length of the longest imperfection in the group. If
two parallel lines of slag inclusions exist, is the 6L dimension measured within each individual line?
Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): What are the rules in Section VIII, Division 1 for maximum permissible offset for a butt
welded joint?
Reply (5): See UW-33.
Question (6): What are the rules in Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the gap between members
when fitting up a corner joint?
Reply (6): Section VIII, Division 1 does not specify dimensional limits; it is the responsibility of the
vessel Manufacturer to use sound engineering judgment based on welding procedure qualification.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-14 and UG-36(c)(3)
File: BC78-148
Question(1): May a single opening not larger than 2 in. pipe size in a vessel shell or head over 3/8 in.
be exempt from the reinforcements requirements of UG-37?
Reply (1): Yes. See UG-36(c)(3).
Question(2): May the opening described in Question (1) be located in a joint in a shell?
Reply (2): Such an opening may only be located in a head-to-shell or other circumferential joint in a
vessel shell, provided the requirements of UW-14(b) are met, including additional radiographic
requirements as prescribed in that paragraph.
Question (3): May the opening described in Question (1) be located in a longitudinal joint in a shell?
Reply (3): No. See reply to Question (2). Additionally, we would direct your attention to UW-14(a)
which indicates that any type of opening meeting the requirements in UG-37 for reinforcement may be
located in a welded joint.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32(h) and Fig. UA-4, Sketch (e)
File: BC78-63
Question: Is D1 as shown in Fig. UG-36, sketch (c) correct to use for the determination of the
required thickness of a conical portion of a toriconical head as described in UG-32(h)?
Reply: Figure UG-36 is not the appropriate figure to be referenced for the required thickness of a
conical portion of a toriconical head as required by UG-32(h). The appropriate figure to be referenced is
Fig. UA-4, sketch (e),
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-35
File: BC77-388
Question: Is it permissible to apply the "U" part stamping to a part of a vessel constructed to
Section VIII, Division 1 requirements under Part UHT using a "low stress" steel stamp in lieu of a
nameplate where this part has a thickness of not less than 1/4 in.?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC78-26
Question: UG-77(a) requires in part that “.....an as-built sketch or tabulation of materials shall be
made, identifying each piece of material with the identification required by UG-93 and the coded
marking.” Does this paragraph require such a sketch or tabulation to apply to components other than the
major pressure components of the vessel, such as small threaded fittings per the requirements of UG-11?
Reply: UG-77(a) is intended to apply to all pressure parts in the vessel, including miscellaneous
pressure parts finished under the provisions of UG-11.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, A-572 Grade 65
File: BC78-85
Question: May steel plate conforming to the specifications of ASTM A-572 Grade 65 be used in
pressure retaining expansion elements in pressure vessels fabricated by welding and designed in
accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. See UG-5(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Effective Gasket Width, Table UA-49.1
File: BC78-171
Question: If the formula, b = (bo/2), when b > 1/4 in., given in Table UA-49.2 under the heading
“Effective Gasket Seating Width, 'b'," applicable when calculations are performed with bo in SI Units?
Reply: This formula, although dimensionally inconsistent, is the correct formula for Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 applications. The value of b is determined in inches and is then converted to
millimeters. We agree that the (mm) in the nomenclature for bo is misleading and we will correct this by
deleting this in a future Errata.
File: BC78-97
Question: Is it correct to interpret that identification requirements for acceptance of material are met
by UG-11(c)(1) and UG-93(a)(2) in reference to welded standard pressure parts, such as flanges, pipe,
and pipe caps, and that Material Test Reports or Certificates of Compliance are not required for such
parts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Form U-1A
File: BC78-149
Questions: In reference to Item 7 of Form U-1A, what shall be recorded under "R.T."? Are the
requirements of UG-116(f) applicable to Form U-1A?
Replies: For "Long" (Category A)joints, "R.T." of Item 7 of Form U-1A relates to
radiographic examination of welded joints per UW-51 (indicating "spot" examination by radiography) or
UW-52 (indicating full examination by radiography), as applicable. Therefore, "spot" or "full" shall be
recorded under "R.T." as required.
"Girth" (Category B) joints, should be recorded in the same manner except that "partial" should
be recorded when the partial radiography provisions of UW-11(a)(5) are applied.
The requirements of UG-116(f) apply to vessel markings, not to Data Reports.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(c), UG-116(g)(1), UG-120, Appendix W
File: BC78-150
Question (1): Is it the intent of UG-116(c) to require that a pressure vessel with a seamless shell be
marked with an "S" under the Code "U" symbol even if lug brackets are attached to the vessel by fillet
welds?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does UG-116(g)(1) require that the letters "HT" applied under the Code symbol for a
seamless vessel made of liquid quenched and tempered SA-372 material but which contains no welds and
thus which has not been postweld heat treated?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is "HT" in line 7 of Form U-1A applicable for pressure vessels which do not require a
postweld heat treatment or other heat treatment by the vessel Manufacturer but are constructed of liquid
quenched and tempered SA-372 materials?
Reply(3): No. See instruction 20, UA-1030, Guide for Preparing Form U-1A .In this case recording
of the material specification and grade in the appropriate location(s) adequately defines the heat
treatment.
Question (4): If the vessel Manufacturer performs a heat treatment other than a postweld heat
treatment, how shall this be recorded on the U-1A Form?
Reply (4): This shall be recorded in accordance with Instruction 20 of UA-1030.
File: BC76-735
Question: May tubes conforming to the chemical and physical properties, heat treating, and melting
requirements of SA-249, Grades TP304 and TP316 but otherwise conforming to the manufacturing
procedures, tolerances, test and marking requirements of SA-688 be used under Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply: Yes. Such material may be used under the provisions of UG-15 of Section VIII,
Division 1.
File: BC78-49
Question: Are hydraulic piston accumulators included in the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, unless the accumulators in question are excluded from the Scope by the provisions
of U-1(c) and, in particular, U-1(c)(3) which applies to mechanical devices where the primary design
considerations and/or stresses are derived from the functional requirements of the device or U-1(c)(9)
which applies to vessels having an inside diameter not exceeding 6 in.
However we caution you that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction. As
indicated by footnote 1 to U-1, Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that may be
different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Hydrostatic Testing with Temporary Attachment. Alteration of
an Existing Vessel
File: BC78-115
Question (1): Is it permissible to weld a temporary connection to a nozzle of a vessel such as a flat head
for the purpose of hydrostatically testing the vessel and then subsequently cut this attachment off when
the vessel is to be installed in the field?
Reply (1): Section VIII, Division 1 does not prohibit temporary welded attachments such as
described in the inquiry for the purpose of hydrostatic testing of the vessel and subsequent removal for
installation. However, the vessel Manufacturer should indicate under "Remarks" on the Manufacturers
Data Report Form that this is how the vessel was furnished and to record any restrictions that might be
applicable to the removal such as maintaining a minimum nozzle length.
Question (2) Is it permissible to weld a flange to a weld neck of an existing Code stamped vessel
manufactured to Section VIII, Division 1 prior to further field installation?
Reply (2): Such welding as described in the question is beyond the Scope of Section VIII, Division
1 as the vessel geometry limit in this case would be the welding end connection of the stub end to which
the flange was welded [See U-1(e)(1)(a)] . Therefore, this may be considered as an alteration to an
existing Code vessel and, as such, would be subject to the laws and regulations at the point of installation
covering such alteration.
File: BC78-122
Question: What percent of the closing seam is required to be examined when Ultrasonic
Examination is substituted for radiographic examination by Par. UW-11(a)(5)(b)(7)?
Reply: The percent of the closing seam to be inspected by Ultrasonic Examination shall be
equivalent to the percent of radiography required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Form U-1A
File: BC78-158
Question(1): In reference to Form U-1A under the item 8(a), what is the interpretation of "min. thk." as
it applies to the minimum head thickness?
Reply (1): As indicated by Note 23 of UA-1030, the "min. thk." described in the question is the
specified minimum thickness of the head after forming, including any corrosion allowance, in. (mm)
specified by the vessel manufacturer. It is not intended to apply to the required minimum thickness as
calculated by UG-32.
Question (2): If a head manufacturer furnishes and certifies a head having a minimum thickness greater
than specified, may that thickness be recorded on Form U-1A?
Reply (2): Yes. This practice would be desirable but is not mandatory.
File: BC78-193
Question (1): For an integral type flange with hub welded to the neck as shown in Fig. UA-48, sketch
(6b) may the weld shown be located at a distance greater than the minimum value given for "h + 1.5 go
(min.)"?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In regard to the distance "h + 1.5 go (min.)" in Question (1), is there a maximum value
where the SH is no longer based on the smaller of 1.5 Sf or 1.5 Sn?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-16(g)(3)(a)
File: BC78-196
Question: Is it the intent of UW-16(g)(3)(a) regarding requirements for fittings with internal threads
to apply to socket welded connections?
Reply: Yes. See Note 5 to UW-16(g)(3)(a).
File: None
Question (1): What is the allowable longitudinal hub stress for the flange illustrated in Fig. UA-48,
sketch (7)?
Reply (1): As prescribed in UA-52(a)(1), the longitudinal hub stress shall not exceed 1.5Sf or 1.5 Sn,
whichever is less.
Question (2). Is there any limitation on the minimum distance from the outside face (side opposite
gasketed face) in Fig. UA-48, sketch (5) to the weld attaching the flange to the vessel shell?
Reply (2): In reference to Fig. UA-48, sketch (5) there is such a minimum distance. This can be
substantiated by sketch (6) which gives a minimum distance of h  1.5 go and its slope is required to 1:3
or less. The sketch in your inquiry has zero slope, which is less than 1:3; therefore the requirements of
sketch (6) are also applicable.
File: BC73-467
Question: In UA-001(d)(2) how are the percentages for coefficients of expansion determined?
Reply: These percentages are determined by the ratio of the absolute difference between the
coefficients of expansion of the tube and tubesheet materials and the smaller of the two coefficients.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Allowable Stress Levels, UG-23
File: BC78-174
Question: Is it mandatory for Section VIII, Division 1 applications to use the allowable stress values
required by UG-23 or may actual yield and tensile values be used to establish higher allowable stress
levels?
Reply: The allowable stress levels indicated by UG-23 are mandatory and may not be exceeded
for Section VIII, Division 1 construction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85(b)
File: BC78-173
Question: Is it the intent of UCS-85(b) to exclude heat treatment specified therein for the following
items?
(a) flanges and elbows complying with UG-11(a),covered by ANSI B16.5 and ANSI 16.9
constructed of materials permitted by those Standards; and
(b) flanges complying with Appendix 11 constructed of P-No. 1 materials.
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-49(b)(3)(d)
File: BC78-189
Question: Is it the intent of UA-49(b)(3)(d) to permit the use of a lower stress value in formula (4)
than that required by Subsection C?
Reply: No. The allowable bolting stress values to be used for a flange designed to Appendix II
are only the values given in the Subsection C. Additional information is given in Appendix S.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UA-280, Reinforcement
File: BC78-214
Question: What is the formula to be used when calculating the Area (A5) added by reinforcing
element?
Reply: A5= (Dp - d - 2tn) te as indicated in Fig. UA-280.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Coil Type Jackets
File: BC77-562
Question: Are there established criteria and details for the design of half-pipe coil jacketed vessels
in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: There are no specific geometric requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 However, it is
our opinion that this type of construction is not prohibited, and that the rules and guidelines in U-2(g) and
UG-101 can be applied for the design, construction, and testing of this type of vessel.
File: BC78-141
Question (1): Is postweld heat treatment per Table UCS-56 required for P-No. 1 materials for a nozzle
welded to a flat cover plate 1-7/8 in. thick per Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (e-2), the maximum fillet weld throat
is not over 1/2 in., and the finished inside diameter of the nozzle is 2 in. or less?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If all of the conditions in Question (1) were the same except that the actual inside
diameter of the nozzle were greater than 2 in., would postweld heat treatment be required?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC78-277
Question: Is it permissible to flame-cut ring or blind flanges from plate material listed in the stress
tables in Section VIII, Division 1 even though the original plate surface is perpendicular to the axis of the
finished flange?
Reply: Yes. The requirement that the plate surface be parallel to the axis of the finished flange
applies only to hubbed flanges (see UA-46).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-80, Out-of-roundness
File: BC78-190
Question: The cylindrical shell of a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel has a required
minimum thickness resulting from design consideration of internal and external pressure of 0.45 in.
Because of additional requirements beyond the Code requirements, the vessel has a wall thickness of 0.75
in. On the basis of the 0.75 thickness, the out-of-roundness exceeds the requirements of UG-80; however,
based on an inscribed circle of 0.45 in. the out-of-roundness does not exceed UG-80 requirements. Is this
in compliance with UG-80?
Reply: If the vessel shell thickness is determined as a result of the external pressure controlling,
the deviation may be in accordance with the provisions of Case 1824 which goes beyond the requirements
of UG-80. If the internal pressure is the controlling factor, the out-of-roundness described in the inquiry
is not in compliance with Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Grades 321H and 347H
File: BC78-29
Question(1): Is it permissible to use Type 321H and 347H material in the form of plate, presently
listed in Section VIII, Division 1 in other product forms for Section VIII, Division 1 construction,
including expansion joints? If so, what allowable stress values may be used?
Reply (1): Type 321H and 347H may be used in the product form of plate under the provisions of
UG-15. Accordingly, the maximum allowable stress values shown for Type 321H and 347H may be
used.
Question (2): Is it permissible to use SA-240 Type 321H and 347H for Section VIII, Division 2
construction?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Foreword
File: BC78-303
Question: A utility company engages in a contract with an architect engineering firm for a complete
plant, which includes several pressure vessels. The architect engineering firm in turn contracts for a given
vessel from a vessel Manufacturer. What is the contract date upon which the mandatory Code
requirements are based?
Reply: The date of contract for a given vessel with the vessel Manufacturer is the date upon
which the mandatory Code requirements are based, in accordance with the Foreword of the Code.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following corrected
interpretation sent to the inquirer.
Correction Issued: August 14, 1978
Question: A utility company engages in a contract with an architect engineering firm for a complete
plant, which includes several pressure vessels. The architect engineering firm enters into a contract with
an equipment supplier who, in turn, contracts for a given vessel from a vessel Manufacturer. What is the
contract date upon which the mandatory Code requirements are based?
Reply: The date of contract for a given vessel with the vessel Manufacturer is the date upon
which the mandatory Code requirements are based, in accordance with the Foreword of the Code.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Effective Date of Code
File: BC78-213
Question: An engineering contractor for a vessel user received a contract prior to the issuance of the
1977 Edition of the Code. Subsequent to January 1, 1978 this engineering contractor enters into a
contract with a vessel Manufacturer. What is the mandatory effective Code to be complied with by the
Manufacturer of the vessel?
Reply: The mandatory effective Code to be used in this case is the 1977 Edition of the Code
including the Summer 1977 Addenda.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SB-161, Nickel 200 Tubing Construction
File: BC77-460
Question: Can hot-finished, annealed, Nickel 200 tubing be used in welded construction satisfying
the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 for sight glass applications?
Reply: Hot-finished Nickel 200 tubing, annealed to meet the requirements of SB-161, may be
certified as SB-161 material and used under the provisions of Table UNF-23.3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-93(d)(3) and Fig. UW-13.2
File: BC78-137
Question(1): Does a joint configuration for a box header similar to Fig. UW-13.2 except that a groove
weld having an "a" dimension equal to ts comply with the intent of UW-13(e)(4)?
Reply (1): No. The "b " dimension for such a configuration would be zero and this would not
comply with the intent of the Code. In this case the configuration shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (a)
would require a groove and fillet weld with an "a" dimension of not less than 2ts.
Question (2): Would it be required by UG-93(d)(3) that the cut edges of the plate in Fig. UW-13.2,
sketch (a) be inspected by PT or MT methods in accordance with UG-93(d)(3)?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC78-74
Question (1): May the stress factors of some acceptable standard be used in conjunction with the
maximum allowable stresses prescribed in UG-23 to accommodate the loadings of UG-22(a)(4) and (6)?
Reply (1): In accordance with U-2(g), it is the responsibility of the Manufacturer to provide
acceptable evidence of compliance to the Authorized Inspector that the stress levels established do not
exceed the requirements prescribed in UG-23.
Question (2): Is it permissible to manufacture and stamp a vessel subject to fluctuating operating
pressure to Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are there requirements prescribed in Section VIII, Division 1 for submitting calculations
when considering fluctuating pressures?
Reply (3): UG-22(2) indicates that rapidly fluctuating pressures shall be one of the loadings to be
considered in designing a vessel. See U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(d) and UG-101
File-. BC78-128
Question (1): Is it the intent of U-2(d) that if the strength of any part cannot be computed with a
satisfactory assurance of safety, the rules of UG-101 provide procedures for establishing its maximum
allowable working pressure?
Reply (1): Yes.
Questions (2) and (3): When utilizing the Brittle-Coating Test Procedure in UG-101(1), is it permissible
to increase the hydrostatic test pressure in steps greater than one-tenth of the anticipated maximum
allowable working pressure after approximately one-half the anticipated working pressure is reached, if
the test is closely observed for an indication of yielding?
Replies (2) and (3): No. UG-101(h) requires maximum steps of one-tenth of the anticipated
maximum allowable working pressure.
Subject:. Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2, UW-3, and Table UW-12
File: BC79-306
Question(1): What is the appropriate weld joint category for a circumferential welded joint attaching a
torispherical head to a shell?
Reply (1): As indicated in UW-3(a)(2), such a welded joint is classified as a Category B joint.
Question (2): For a vessel intended to operate below -20° F and constructed of Type 321 stainless steel,
what type of joint is required for the Category B joint described in Question (1)?
Reply (2) In accordance with UW-2(b)(2), all joints of Category B intended for such low
temperature service shall be either Type No. (1) or No. (2) of Table UW-12.
Question (3): Assuming that all Category A and B butt welds have been radiographed for their entire
length, what type of joint would be required for Category A in order to use an E factor of 1.0 in all shell
and head calculations?
Reply (3): In accordance with Table UW-12 a Type No. (1) butt weld would be required for
Category A joints in order to utilize an E factor of 1.0 for shell and head thickness calculations under such
circumstances.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 and 2, UG-18, UW-16, and Fig. AD-621.1, sketch (c)
File: BC78-289
Question (1): A vessel is to be manufactured under Section VIII, Division 1 having a shell of Code
approved low alloy in steel material clad on the inside with austenitic stainless steel. An austenitic
stainless steel nozzle is inserted into the shell utilizing a detail similar to Fig. AD-621.1, sketch (c) in
Section VIII, Division 2. Is this detail permitted in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Fig. UW-16.1 covers some acceptable types of welded nozzles for Section VIII, Division
1 construction. Provided the welds and nozzle dimensions satisfy the rules shown under UW-16 and U-
2(g), the weld detail described in the inquiry is acceptable. We also refer you to UW-15 regarding
requirements for weld strength.
Question (2): For the weld detail as described in Question (1), is it permissible to demonstrate
compliance with UG-18 regarding welding of dissimilar materials by the use of service experience only?
Reply (2): No. It is necessary to demonstrate such compliance by providing appropriate design
details in accordance with U-2(g).
Question (3): Is it permissible to contravene specific Code rules in Section VIII, Division 1 if a special
analysis or experiment is performed?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): For the weld detail in Question (1), what stress concentration factor is applied for the
longitudinal stress in the nozzle at the weld root?
Reply (4): Section VIII, Division 1 does not contain specific rules covering such factors; thus, it is
necessary to comply with U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1
File: BC76-801
Question (1): A heat exchanger for an air-conditioning system consists of shell and tube side, both
sides designed for less than 250 psi and each side having less than 5 cu ft in volume. May such a vessel
be stamped with the "UM" Stamp?
Reply (1): Such a vessel may be stamped with a "UM" Stamp, provided that each chamber is an
independent pressure chamber as described in UG-19(a) and the provisions of U-1(j) are complied with.
Question (2): Is the volume of the shell side of the heat exchanger described in Question (1) determined
as the total shell volume minus the volume taken up by the tube side?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the heat exchanger described in Question (1) was constructed with the shell side having
a pressure of 15 psi or less, would the shell side require stamping with a "U" or "UM" Stamp?
Reply (3): Such a pressure chamber would not require a "U' Stamp and could not be stamped with a
"UM" Stamp. [see U-1(j).]
Question (4): If the heat exchanger in Question (1) was constructed with the shell side containing 120
gal or less of water, does such a pressure chamber fall within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (4): Such a pressure chamber is not considered to be within the Scope of Section VIII,
Division 1 as per U-1(c)(6).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(g)(2), UW-2(c); Section I
File: BC78-95
Question: U-1(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 states in part:

The following pressure vessels in which steam is generated shall be constructed in accordance with the
rules of this Division:
(1) vessels known as evaporators or heat exchangers
(2) vessels in which steam is generated by the use of heat resulting from operation of a processing
system containing a number of pressure vessels such as used in the manufacture of chemical and
petroleum products
The preamble of Section I also excludes such unfired pressure vessels in which steam is
generated from the definition of unfired steam boilers.
Do the rules of UW-2(c) which include radiography and postweld heat treatment requirements
apply to such vessels?
Reply: The requirements of UW-2(c) do not apply to such vessels. However, other rules, such as
UCS-56 or UCS-57, might require postweld heat treatment or radiography.
We caution you that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction. As
indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that may be
different or more restrictive than the Code rules. Some applicable laws may require such vessels to be
constructed either with the provisions of UW-2(c) applied or under the rules of Section I.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1 and UA-60(f)
File: BC78-170
Question. U-1(c)(8) indicates that a vessel having an internal or external operating pressure not
exceeding 15 psi with no limitation on size is not considered to be within the Scope of Section VIII,
Division 1. Is this still true, if under temporary or abnormal operating conditions the operating pressure
may exceed 15 psi?
Reply: As defined in UA-60(f) the operating pressure (temporary or abnormal) shall not exceed
the maximum allowable working pressure. Thus, if the vessel's maximum allowable working pressure
does not exceed 15 psi, it is excluded from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
However, we caution you that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction.
As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that may
be different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Documentation of Radiography, UW-51
File: BC78-312
Question: A vessel Manufacturer contracts an outside firm to perform radiography required by

Section VIII, Division 1. Evidence is presented to the Inspector that the individual who performs the
radiographic examination is qualified in accordance with UW-51(a)(3). Does Section VIII, Division 1
require that this individual identify or document by signature the radiographic examination he performed?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not specify the method by which individual radiographs are
accepted by the Authorized Inspector. This is documented in the Quality Control Manual of the vessel
Manufacturer which is reviewed and accepted by the ASME reviewing team at the time Of review of the
Manufacturer's facility.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Design of Jacketed Vessels
Date Issued: June 28,1978
File: BC78-323
Question(1): In a jacketed vessel, assume that the jacket is to be designed for a maximum allowable
working pressure of 100 psi and the vessel is to be designed for a maximum allowable working pressure
of 50 psi. Under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, must the common shell of the vessel be designed
for an external pressure of 100 psi?
Reply(1): The rules of UG-19(a) govern this question and, for certain applications, would permit
design of the common shell for an external pressure equal to the maximum differential pressure possible
between the jacket and the vessel. Also see UG-99(e) concerning hydrostatic testing) of such units.
Question (2): If a jacketed vessel, as in Question (1), is equipped with instruments to limit the
differential pressure between the two independent chambers, may the maximum pressure differential for
external pressure design of the common shell be based on the instruments control pressure?
Reply (2): No. See UG-125(h).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1. UCS-85
File: BC78-295
Question UCS-85(e) exempts materials classified as P-No. 1 Group Nos. 1 and 2 of QW-422 of
Section IX from the requirements of UCS-85(b) when the heat treatment during fabrication is limited to
postweld heat treatment. For dished heads made of material classified as P-No. 1 Group No. 1 or 2, such
as SA-515 or SA-516 plate material, and which are hot formed in the normalizing range and subsequently
postweld heat treated., is it required to carry out the testing of the coupons in accordance with UCS-85(b)
using the same heat treating cycle and subsequent postweld heat treatment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52(d)(2)(c)
File: BC78-321
Question: Is further radiographic examination required in accordance with UW-52 for an area
which was rejected under the requirements of UW-52(d)(2)(a) and subsequently repaired? .
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99(a), Welding of Attachments After the Final Hydrostatic
Test
File: BC78-325
Question (1): May nonpressure attachments be welded to a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel
subsequent to the final hydrostatic test required by UG-99(a) without subsequent hydrostatic testing and
prior to the stamping of the completed vessel?
Reply (1): No. Section VIII, Division 1 requires that the final hydrostatic test as required by
UG-99(a) be the last operation prior to the stamping of the completed vessel.
Question (2): Is it permissible to weld nonpressure attachments to a Code stamped Section VIII,
Division 1 vessel, and what are the additional applicable requirements?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Division 1 is a Code for original construction of a vessel including all
aspects prior to and including the stamping of the vessel. Additional welding of nonpressure attachments
to a Code stamped vessel is a matter to be reviewed between the user of the vessel and any regulatory
authorities at the point of installation of the vessel. Provided the procedure is acceptable to such
regulatory authorities, this may be permissible.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-33 and Part UHT
File: BC78-227
Question (1): Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that the limits of Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (1) or (n)
are to be used for the design of a joint and that the alignment tolerances given in UHT-20 shall be used in
addition to Fig. UW-13.1 even though the limits of that figure are exceeded?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it the intent of UW-33(a) and (b) to satisfy the requirements for alignment tolerances of
butt joints whereas UW-33(c) is intended to satisfy only the offset due to a difference in thickness of the
two plates being joined?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-903 and UA-904
File: BC78-268
Question (1): Is it the intent of UA-903 that linear type discontinuities which have a signal amplitude
above the reference level are acceptable unless their length exceeds:
1/4 in. (6 mm) for t up to 3/4 in. (19 mm)
1/3t for t from 3/4 in. (19 mm) to 2-1/4 in. (57 mm)
3/4 in. (19 mm) for t over 2-1/4 in. (57 mm)
where t is the thickness of the weld being examined?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are linear discontinuities which have a signal amplitude exceeding 50% but less than
100% of the reference level acceptable regardless of length, although required to be recorded by
UA-904?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is it the intent of UA-904 to permit all discontinuities having signal amplitude below the
level of 50% to be disregarded?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC78-293
Question: Section VIII, Division 1 does not list seamless pipe for Grade TP304L under SA-376.
Section II lists this grade under SA-376. This grade is listed in other product forms such as seamless pipe
conforming to SA-312 and plate conforming to SA-240. May SA-376 Grade TP304L be used for Section
VIII, Division 1 construction utilizing the maximum allowable stress values listed for these other product
forms of the same grade?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-15 are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UA-48 sketch (5) Longitudinal Hub Stress and U-2(g)
File: BC78-305
Question: Up to and including the Summer 1978 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1, what are the
longitudinal hub stress limits applicable to Fig. UA-48 sketch (5)?
Reply: UA-52 does not address the appropriate longitudinal hub stress limits for Fig. UA-48
sketch (5). Therefore, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be followed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-57(a) and UW-11(a)(4)
File: BC78-311
Question: Is it the intent of UW-11(a)(4) to require radiography for Type No. 1, Category B and C
butt welds in nozzles and communicating chambers that neither exceed 10 in. nominal pipe size nor 1-1/8
in. wall thickness in vessels built in accordance with Part UHT of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes. Such welded joints require complete radiographic examination in accordance with
UHT-57(a) for vessels built under Part UHT.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Welding of Attachments to a Code Stamped Vessel
File: BC78-167
Question: Is it permissible to weld nonpressure attachments to a Code stamped Section VIII,

Division 1 vessel, and. what are the additional applicable requirements?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 is a Code of original construction of a vessel including all
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Welding on a Code Stamped Vessel
File: BC78-228
Question: If a vessel has been manufactured and stamped to Section VIII, Division 1, is it
permissible for a company that assembles the vessel into a system to perform seal welding on the vessel's
threaded piping fittings?
Reply: Such welding is outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1, and, as such, would be
subject to the laws and regulations of the jurisdiction at the point of installation. Such a regulatory body
would set forth the applicable procedures for maintaining Code compliance for the vessel.
An alternate procedure to better satisfy the assembling company's need might be to have the
vessel manufacturer install and seal weld the first piping fittings into the vessel fitting. Under remarks,
the Manufacturers Data Report should indicate that this was done by the vessel manufacturer, but in
accordance with U-1(e)(1) the geometric scope of Section VIII, Division 1, stopped at the threaded vessel
fitting. Under these conditions, subsequent assembly work could proceed without dependence on Section
VIII rules.
File: BC78-292
Question: May a welded manway ring which complies with a Manufacturer's Standard be used in a
Section VIII, Division 1 vessel without a Partial Data Report Form, authorized inspection, or
identification in accordance with UG-93 if the ring meets the applicable requirements of UG-11(c)(1), (2),
(3), and (4)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-23(c)
File: BC78-302
Question(1): In determining the maximum direct (membrane) stress as described in UG-23(c), may
this be done by the use of any appropriate stress combination theory such as maximum stress, maximum
strain, or maximum shear provided the requirement of U-2(g) is satisfied?
Reply (1): Yes, except all formulas and rules given in the text and mandatory appendices of this
Division must be met regardless of what theory of failure is selected to satisfy U-2(g).
Question (2): UA-266 of Appendix L illustrates the use of the maximum stress theory used in Section
VIII, Division 1. Does this preclude the use of other stress combination theories?
Reply (2): No. See Reply (1).
File: BC78-396
Question (1): Is it required by UG-77 that the serial number of the final vessel assembly be marked on
each piece of material which is divided into two or more parts prior to fabrication of the vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When material is cut into two or more pieces, does UG-77(a) require, prior to cutting,
either the transfer of the required identification markings to each piece or the use of a coded marking on
each piece to maintain identification?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC78-405
Question: In UG-36(c)(3)(a) and UG-36(c)(3)(b) a reference is made to "3 in. pipe size" and "2 in
pipe size." Do these sizes refer to the size of the opening which would be required to be cut into the vessel
in order to accommodate such a pipe?
Reply: Yes. For 2 in. pipe size this dimension would be 2.375 in., and for 3 in. pipe size this
dimension would be 3.500 in.
File: BC78-114
Question: Is it the intent of UG-35(b) to permit a quick-actuating closure to a vessel having only
one locking element in its locking device (one center bolt)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11, Manufacturer's Standard
File: BC78-328
Question: May the pressure-temperature ratings given in ANSI B16.31-1971 be used for flanges
used in Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessels under the provisions of UG-11(a)(1)?
Reply: Since ANSI-B16.31 is not now listed in UG-44, they cannot be used under the provisions
of UG-11(a)(1) and footnote 49 applicable to an ANSI standard.
In accordance with footnote 51, such flanges could be used at the pressure-temperature ratings of
ANSI-B16.31 provided they satisfied the requirements of UG-11(a)(1) applicable to a Manufacturer's
Standard including footnote 50.
File: BC78-349
Question (1): Is it acceptable for a material supplier to transfer information from a Material
Manufacturer's Certification or Certificate of Compliance, under his letterhead, in lieu Of furnishing a
copy of the Material Manufacturer's CMTR or Certificate of Compliance as required by UG-93?
Reply (1): It is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that a material supplier shall not transcribe data
certified by a Material Manufacturer but shall furnish a copy of that certification, supplemented as
necessary by additional documents which certify the results of tests, examinations, repairs, or treatments
required by the basic Material Specification and performed by the material supplier.
Question (2): Is it required by Section VIII, Division 1 for the CMTR or Certificate of Compliance
described in Question (1), that either a metallurgist signature or a notarized signature appear on this
document?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)(6), UG-19(a), and UG-99(e)
File: BC78-351
Question: When applying the exemption for a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel in U-1(c)(6)
to the tube side of a shell and tube heat exchanger when the tube side contains only water, should the 120
gal nominal water-containing capacity be applied to the entire water containing capacity of the tube side,
including both channels or heads and tubes, or should it be applied separately to each channel and head?
Reply: The intent of Section VIII, Division 1 regarding multiple chamber vessels is that each
pressure chamber be treated as a separate pressure vessel. In the case of a shell or tube type heat
exchanger as covered by your inquiry, U-1(c)(6) would apply to the total volume of the channels or heads
and tubes. The channel sections or heads and the tubes would not be treated independently in determining
volume of the water side of the heat exchanger. The intent of U-1(d)(2) is further clarified by UG-19(a)
and UG-99(e) that deal with combination units. As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 in Section VIII,
Division 1, the Code does not take precedence over pressure vessel laws that may exist at the point of
installation.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-16(d), UG-27, and UG-45(a)(2), Wall Thickness of Nozzles
and Shells
File: BC77-291
Question (1): Is a 12-1/2% reduction of wall thickness for diameters other than those listed in Table 2
of ANSI B36.10-1970 required for the determination of nozzle neck thickness in accordance with UG-
45(a)(2)?
Reply (1): Yes. See footnote 19 to UG-45(a)(2).
Question (2): Is it required, after the minimum required wall thickness per UG-27(c) is determined, that
this thickness shall be increased by an amount sufficient to provide the manufacturing undertolerance
allowed in the pipe or tube specification?
Reply (2): Yes. See UG-16(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-27 and UA-1, Use Of Corrosion in Thickness Calculations
File: BC77-.191
Question (1): When plate is used for pressure parts, what procedure shall be used to determine the
thickness using the inside radius when calculating the thickness per UG-27 required to resist pressure?
How is corrosion allowance considered?
Reply (1): In accordance with UG-27(b), R equals the inside radius of the shell course under
consideration, before corrosion allowance is added, that is, in the corroded condition. Therefore, for
example, if the inside diameter of a vessel is 60 in., with 1/4 in. corrosion allowance, the appropriate
value of R to insert in the equation for the determination of minimum required thickness in UG-27 is
30.25 in. Further, after the value of t is calculated, the corrosion allowance (1/4 in. in this example) is
added to that result.
Question (2): How is corrosion allowance applied to formulas written in terms of outside dimensions?
Reply (2): UA-1 contains formulas for cylindrical and spherical shells in terms of outside radius.
The minimum required thickness is as defined in UG-27(b) in the nomenclature for t.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-27(b) and UW-28(b); Section IX, QW-451
File: BC78-78
Question: Is the automatic upset electric resistance welding process permitted for Section VIII,
Division 1 construction under UW-27, and how shall the qualification of welding procedure under
UW-28(b) be complied with?
Reply: Such a welding process is permitted by UW-27(b),and the qualification of the welding
procedure required by UW-28(b) shall be complied with by the making and mechanical testing of sample
welds in accordance with the requirements of QW-451 of Section IX.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Welding of Attachments to a Code Stamped Pressure Vessel
File: BC78-167
Question (1): Is it permissible to weld nonpressure attachments to a Code stamped Section VIII,
Division 1 vessel, and what are the additional applicable requirements?
Reply (1): Section VIII, Division 1 is a Code for original construction of a vessel including all
Question (2): If a vessel has been previously hydrostatically tested but requires rework before
stamping, may a subsequent pneumatic test be made in lieu of a hydrostatic test assuming the provisions
of UG-100(a)(1) and (a)(2) are not a factor?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Where a pneumatic test is permitted, what special procedures must be observed?
Reply (3): The procedure requirements are contained in UG-100 and its footnotes. As indicated in
footnote 26 special safety precautions are recommended.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g), UG-28, and UG-101
File: BC78-353
Question (1): A horizontal vessel is mounted on two vertical vessels by means of a solid pad which
extends around a portion of the circumference of the horizontal vessel. The pad is welded around the
periphery to both the horizontal and vertical vessels. Do the rules of UG-28 regarding external pressure
apply to this configuration?
Reply (1): Assuming that these vessels are under internal pressure, UG-28 would not apply with the
exception of UG-28(i) relative to a portion of the vessel subject to collapsing pressure in the local area of
the pad. Some other applicable paragraphs to be considered are UG-22(a)(3) regarding the consideration
of loading due to weight of the vessel and its contents, and UG-23(b) for calculation of the maximum
allowable longitudinal compressive stresses.
Question (2): Are the bevel welds in the vessel described in Question (1) which connect the outside and
inside diameters to the pad around the periphery covered by Fig. UW-13.2?
Reply (2): This weld configuration is not specifically covered by Section VIII, Division 1; however,
it is not prohibited providing U-2(g) is complied with.
File: BC78-356
Question: A manhole cover on a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel contains 12 tapped holes for the
attachment of 3 flanged valves. Some of the tapped holes are of the same depth as the thickness of the
cover. No extra metal is added to the inside surface of the cover. Is this in compliance with UG-43(d)?
Reply: No. The intent of UG-43(d) is that such tapped holes shall not penetrate within one-fourth
of the wall thickness from the inside surface of the vessel after deducting corrosion allowance.
File: BC78-403
Question: Are tile requirements of UG-47 for braced and stayed surfaces applicable to tubes welded
to tubesheets in a pressure vessel manufactured Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The rules for braced and stayed surfaces in UG-47 are normally not applied in the design
of' tubes welded to tubesheets; however, there are no specific rules covering this in Section VIII, Division
1 We refer you to the requirements of U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g) and UA-53(a)
File: BC78-410
Question (1): Is a split loose flange, having a closely toleranced machined spigot, fitting in an equally
machined groove required to be in compliance with UA-53(a)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If a connecting plate is used in conjunction with the split loose flange described in
Question (1), may this be designed as a solid flange utilizing 100% Mo as defined in UA-50?
Reply (2): There are no specific rules Covering this construction in Section VIII, Division 1 Refer to
U-2(g).
Subject,Section VIII, Division 1, UG-33
File: BC78-411
Question: A torispherical head with pressure on the convex side has a crown radius equal to the
inside diameter of the vessel and a knuckle radius equal to 15% of the inside diameter of the vessel. Is this
permitted by UG-33(e)?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-33(a) are met.
File: None
Question (1): Are hydraulic cylinders included in the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, unless the cylinders in question are excluded from the Scope by the provisions of U-
1(c) and, in particular, U-1(c)(3) which applies to mechanical devices where the primary design
considerations and/or stresses are derived from the functional requirements of the device or U-1(c)(9)
which applies to vessels having an inside diameter not exceeding 6 in.
In any case, the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction and/or pressure
testing requirements. As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 of Section VIII, Division 1 , such laws must be
reviewed to determine requirements that may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Question (2): If these hydraulic cylinders are constructed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 ,
may the hydrostatic test be conducted at the point of installation rather than at the Manufacturer's plant?
Reply (2): Yes. Procedures for such field work are defined in U-2(i).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UW-12 and UG-101 , Baffle-to-Shell Joints
File: BC78-352
Question (1) A heat exchanger utilizes a seamless pipe for the shell material. The pipe is split for a
portion of its length in order to provide for the attachment of a baffle which is cut to fit the inside
diameter, and hence the weld becomes a type No 2 joint per Table UW 12. No radiography is performed
in the vessel. Are there any conditions under which the joint efficiency may be recorded for the
longitudinal joint as 100%.
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): All the conditions in Question (1) are the same except that the longitudinal baffle projects
through the shell so that a corner joint is formed in accordance with Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (a), (c) (d), or
(e). Are there any conditions under which the joint efficiency. relay be recorded for the longitudinal
joint as 100%?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC78-41
Question: A vessel has a flat head which is secured to a vessel by means of swing-away bolts. The
equation used to calculate the thickness is given in UG-34(c)(2), Eq. (1) There is no specific sketch in
Fig, UG-34 covering this method of attachment. What is the value of C to be used in this Calculation?
Reply: Since Section VIII, Division 1 does not cover nor prohibit this construction, no C value is
prescribed. Therefore, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be complied with.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-135 and Appendix M
File; BC78-495
Question (1): In Section VIII, Division 1 , UG-135(e)(1), does the reference to "when stop valves are
so constructed or positively, controlled” in the Code include the use of chains and locks with the lock key
under the control of an authorized person at the facility to assure that the block valve is locked open or
closed as the case may be?
Reply (1): UG-135(e)(1) covers the case where multiple relief devices are installed and one or more
block valves may be closed at one time without reducing tile capacity of the unaffected devices below the
required capacity.
The use of chains and locks as described above on intervening stop valves between the vessel and
its protective device or devices, or between the protective device or devices and the point of discharge is
all acceptable means of positive control.
Question (2): As stated in Section VIII, Division 1, UG-135(c)(2), are the provisions of UA-354(a),
Appendix M, applicable as all alternative to UG-135(e)(1)?
Reply (2): UA-354(a) of Appendix M states "A vessel, in which pressure can be generated because
of service conditions, may have a full-area stop valve between it and its pressure relieving device for
inspection and repair purposes only. When such a stop valve is provided, it shall be so arranged that it can
be locked or sealed open, and it shall not be closed except by an authorized person who shall remain
stationed there during that period of the vessel's operation within which the valve remains closed, and
who shall again lock or seal the stop valve in the open position) before leaving the station." Since
Appendix M is listed alternative in the body of the Code as stated in UG-135(e)(2), the provisions of UA-
354(a) satisfy the rules of Section III, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g), UG-11, and UG-101
File BC78-467
Question: What is the interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1 with regard to the rules applicable
to a specially designed welded obround flange to be furnished for incorporation into such Code
constructed pressure vessels?
Reply: The rules of Section VIII, Division 1 do not cover the determination of the thickness of
an obround flange. The following alternatives are acceptable:
(1) As stated in U-2(g) in Section VIII. Division 1, the code rules do not contain rules to cover all
details of design and construction. Under these paragraphs, your flanges could be furnished, subject to the
inspector’s acceptance. To satisfy these requirements, the boiler or pressure vessel Manufacturer would
have to submit to the Inspector detailed design calculations and / or conduct a proof test under the
provisions of UG-11(c) of Section VIII, Division 1.
(2) As an alternative to (1), it is possible to carry out a number of proof tests and / or calculations
covering a range of geometries and pressure-temperature ratings in order to develop a manufacturer’s
standard as provided for in UG-11(c) of Section VIII, Division 1. In this instance, these flanges can be
accepted by the Inspector of the boiler or pressure vessel for inclusion in Code construction, provided that
the standard outlines the method for determining the rating and further, the calculation and / or proof test
data are available for review by the Inspector for the vessel. We direct your attention to UG-101(e) in
Section VIII, Division 1 which requires that proof tests to establish maximum allowable working pressure
require the witness and acceptance of an Authorized Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 Appendix 11-U-2(g) and UA-45, Flat Faced Flanges with Full
Face Gaskets
Date issued: August 28 1978
File: BC78-539
Question: Are there rules in Section VIII, Division 1 covering the design of flat face flanges with
full face gaskets?
Reply: The rules of Section VIII, Division 1 do not contain a method for such a design. As
indicated by UA-45(e)(2) of Appendix 11, bolted flanges using full face gaskets are not prohibited
provided the method is in accordance with good engineering practice and is acceptable to the Inspector.
Interpretation: VIII .78-121

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 .UG-43(c)
File: BC78-527
Question: Is it the intent of the second and third paragraphs of UG-43(e) to apply to a type of
threaded connection where a fitting or pipe is welded to a vessel wall and has either internal or external
threading covered by UW-16?
Reply: No. These paragraphs are applicable only to a type of threaded connection where there is
a threaded hole in the vessel wall.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (f)
File: BC78-534
Question: To what category does the butt weld shown in Fig. UW-13.1(f) of Section VIII, Division
1 belong?
Reply: The butt weld shown in Fig. UW-1 3.1(f) of Section VIII, Division 1 is a Category B
joint. Radiography may or may not, therefore, be a requirement as prescribed by other Code paragraphs.
File: None
Question: Are Material Test Reports required for SA-53 Grade A or B for construction under
Section VIII, Division 1?
Material Test Reports from the Manufacturer provided the pieces are marked in accordance with Section
20 under that Specification. Further, the requirements of UG-93 and UG-94 shall be complied with.
ATTENTION
interpretation sent to the inquirer:
Correction Issued: October 4, 1978
It has been called to our attention that since the Winter 1977 Addenda to Section II, Part A, the
appropriate reference for the requirements for marking was redesignated. Accordingly, the following is a
corrected reply to our previous reply as referenced above:
Material Test Reports from the Manufacturer provided the pieces are marked in accordance with Section
21.1 under that Specification. Further, the requirements of UG-93 and UG-94 shall be complied with.
File: BC78-526
Question: Is the reference to tapping the required telltale hole for a preliminary compressed air and
soapsuds test for tightness of welds in UW-15(c) an optional requirement of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Heating Coil Consisting of SA-53 Pipe
File: BC78-528
Question (1): A heating coil consisting of an SA-53 pipe containing natural gas at 700 or 800 psi and
having an inside diameter of 6 in. or less falls outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 per U-1(c)(9).
May this be manufactured and stamped to Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes. See U-1(i).

Question (2): Can the heating coil in Question (1) be considered a complete vessel and be stamped with
a U symbol and be reported on the U-1A Form?
Reply (2)Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-44(b) and U-2(g)
File: BC78-322
Question: Do the requirements of UG-44(b) apply to both screw threads and stud threads, and what
are the applicable rules for engagement length.
Reply: The requirements of UG-44(b) apply to both screw threads and stud threads, This
paragraph gives requirements for minimum engagement length; however, it is the responsibility of the
vessel Manufacturer to determine that the actual engagement length includes the appropriate chamfer and
other tolerances. See U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Defects in Plate
File: BC78-556
Question (1): Is it permissible to measure injurious defects such as pits on plate used for Section VIII,
Division 1 construction based on the actual measured thickness at the location of the defect rather than the
ordered thickness given on the Mill Test Report?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question: Is the permissible depth of the defects described in Question (1) based on the limits given
by the applicable Material Specification and the minimum required thickness for the vessel?
Reply (2) Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-56.1 , Postweld Heat Treatment as an Essential
Variable in Welding Procedure Qualification
File: BC78-572
Question: May a WPS from a welding procedure which had been qualified with postweld heat treat-
merit on a P-No. 1 test plate held at 1100 F (minimum) for one hour per inch of thickness be used in the
fabrication of a vessel from the same material which will be postweld heat treated at 900 F for 10 hr
(minimum) per inch of thickness without requalification?
Reply: Yes. For Section VIII, Division 1 vessels this is covered by Table UCS-56.1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 UG-134, Pressure Relief Valves
File: BC78-583
Question (1) What are the requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 pertaining to set pressure of
pressure relief devices on vessels storing liquefied compressed gases and which satisfy the conditions of
UG-125(c)(3)?
Reply (1): Such relief devices may be set in accordance with UG-125(c)(3)(b).and UG-1 34
including the special provisions of UG-134(e)(2).
Question (2): Is it required that the vessel Manufacturer furnish the pressure relieving device(s) by UG-
125(a)?
Reply (2): No. Footnote 31 indicates that safety devices need not be provided by the vessel
Manufacturer, but overpressure protection shall be provided prior to placing the vessel in service.
Applicable jurisdictional requirements should be reviewed to determine limitations which may be
different or more restrictive than the Code rules referenced in Question (1).
File: BC78-574
Question: Is it permissible to use carbon steel pipe for pressure parts on a Section VIII, Division 1
pressure Vessel under the following conditions:
(1) the pipe is ordered to SA-53 Grade B specifications;
(2) the Material Test Report for the pipe indicates that it complies with both API 5L and ASTM
A-53 Grade B specifications;
(3) the markings on the pipe itself are in accordance with API 5L specifications only?
Reply: Yes, provided the pipe is not manufactured with filler metal added and UG-10 is
complied with.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84, UHA-5 1, and UHT-6
File: BC78-578
Question: Are the following assumptions correct with regard to the requirements for qualifying a
welding procedure for Type 304 stainless steel where the design of the vessel is below -20°F but not
lower than -325°F?
(1) Impact test shall be made with the notch in the weld metal. The heat affected zone need not
be checked.
(2) Acceptance criterion is 0.015 in. minimum lateral expansion. Measured values shall be
recorded.
(3) Energy absorption values (ft-lbs or joules) may be recorded for "information," but that is not
mandatory requirement.
(4) Filler metal shall be the same E-Number that will be used in production, such as,
measurement of lateral expansion of an E309 (less than 0.10% C) deposit would not qualify for an E308
deposit.
Reply: The following answers are in the numerical order described in the question.
(1) Correct. See UHA-51(b)(5) and UG-84.
(2) Correct. See UG-84(c)(4)(b) and UHT-6.
(3) Correct.
(4) Incorrect. E309 and E308 are both of A-No. 8 Weld Metal Analysis per QW-441 of Section
IX. See UHA-51(b)(5)(a)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Material Requirements
File: BC78-568
Question (1): Is it permissible to use ASME/ASTM SA-516-74 plates with all mandatory requirements
conforming to this specification except for the aluminum content, ranging up to 0.040% for pressure
vessels and parts constructed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 (1977)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): What are the reasons the bend test became a supplementary requirement for ASME/
ASTM SA-516 plates after 1974?
Reply (2): The bend test requirement of SA-516 was deleted as a mandatory requirement due to the
consensus that the test did not give any meaningful information. Furthermore, since the tensile tests are
required to be transverse to the final direction of rolling, the elongation requirement provides adequate
assurance of ductility.
Question (3): What are the restrictions for using ASTM/ASME SA-516 plates without bend test in
pressure vessels and parts constructed according to the ASME Code Section VIII, Division 1 (1977)?
Reply (3): None.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-90 and UG-93, Quality Inspection of Materials
File: BC78-458
Question (1): Section VIII, Division 1 requires inspection of materials for defects in accordance with
UG-93(d) and for required thickness in accordance with UG-90(b)(6). May such operations be Performed
by other organizations, including Material Manufacturers or Suppliers, responsible to the vessel
Manufacturer?
Reply (1): Yes. See U-2(b)(2).
Question (2): If operations as described in Question (1) are permitted, what rules apply to the
procedures that must be followed?
Reply (2): The procedures must be defined in the written description of the Manufacturer's Quality
Control System. See U-2(h) and Appendix X.
Question (3): May operations as described above be performed at a location away from tile vessel
Manufacturer's plant such as at the plant of a Material Manufacturer?
Reply (3): Yes, providing the Quality Control System suitably covers such operations at the plant of
others and at the vessel Manufacturer's plant.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(b)(1) and (c)(4)(a)
File: BC78-577
Question: UG-84(b)(1) refers to the requirements of SA-370 with regard to impact test procedures.
SA-370, in par. 20.1.1, indicates that, unless otherwise specified, longitudinal test specimens shall be used
with the notch perpendicular to the Surface of the object being tested. Assuming compliance with Table
UG-84.1 is required per UG-84(c)(4)(a), are these longitudinal specimens permitted for Code compliance
even though transverse specimens on the same material might produce values which do not meet Table
UG-84.1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC78-579
Question: Is it the intent of UG-99(b) that the minimum hydrostatic test be based on the maximum
allowable working pressure determined by the design formulas given in Section VIII, Division 1 even
though additional material may be present for corrosion allowance?
Reply: Yes. However, UG-99(c) and (d) provide alternative rules for higher hydrostatic test
pressures.
File: BC78-580
Question: Two pressure vessels, each with a separate U symbol and Manufacturer's Data Report,
are welded together at their respective nozzles. Is the weld itself subject to the requirements of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. U-1(e)(1)(a) indicates that the geometry of pressure-containing parts includes the
welding end connection for the first circumferential joint for welded connections. Further, this welding is
being done subsequent to the stamping of the vessel. The applicable requirements are those indicated by
the jurisdictional authorities at the point of installation.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Jurisdiction Heat Exchangers
File: BC78-548
Question (1): A heat exchanger contains a refrigerant on the shell side that places the shell side within
the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 and water on the tube side, If the tube side is exempt from the
Scope by U-1(c)(6) and is an independent pressure chamber, do the tube side parts, such as heads and
channels, which are not common with the shell side need to follow Code rules for material and design?
Reply (1): No. See also UG-19(a) and UG-116(l).
Question (2): Are the common parts, such as tubesheets and in the heat exchanger described in
Question (1), required to comply with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for materials and design?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): In U-1(c)(6) is it intended that the word "water" may include salt water, brackish water,
or brine?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-23, Notes (19) and (20)
File: BC78-581
Question: Is it the intent of Notes (19) and (20) to Table UCS-23 to prohibit the use of materials
listed which reference these Notes above 800 F and 875 F, respectively?
Reply: No; however, the vessel designer should be so cautioned by these Notes in his
metallurgical considerations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Case 1177-7, Bellows Joint Design
File: BC78-626
Question: Is it permissible to use a weld joint efficiency of 1.0 for the longitudinal seam weld in
bellows that does not exceed 1/8 in. t that has been made under Code Case 1177-7 where the
Manufacturer and Inspector have exercised reasonable judgment in assessing a joint for an individual
application?
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that the longitudinal weld in a bellows is a Category A
welded joint. In order to be an E = 1.0 joint, it must be a Type 1 with full radiography or otherwise
meeting UW-11(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-15(c), Reinforcing Pads
File: BC78-526
Question: Does UW-15(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 require that reinforcing pads be given a
preliminary compressed air and soapsuds test for tightness of welds that seal off to the inside of the
vessel?
Reply: A preliminary compressed air and soapsuds test may be given.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Table UCS-56 and Table AF-402.1
File: BC78-667
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of Table UCS-56 and Table AF-402.1 of Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 to make a 1 in. thick full penetration weld of a P-No. 1 material to 1-3/4 in. thick
P-No. 1 material, using a 200°F minimum preheat, without postweld heat treating the 1 in. thick weld?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-84(d)(1) and AM-204.4, Impact Test Requirements
File: BC78-709
Question (1): Is it a requirement that the Material Manufacturer calibrate his impact test machine using
USAMRC specimens, or may he perform the calibrations using another procedure which is commonly
used in his country for calibrating of Charpy Impact Test Machine?
Reply (1): A Material Manufacturer must calibrate his impact test machine using USAMRC
specimens to comply with requirements of UG-84(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): If the vessel manufacturer performs the impact testing, is it a requirement that his impact
test machine be calibrated using USAMRC specimens?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Does the Material Manufacturer's Report of impact tests provide satisfactory evidence
that his impact test machine was calibrated as required by the Code when the purchase order references
applicable requirements?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g), Design of Tubesheets
File: BC78-693
Question: Can the provisions of UG-47 and Appendix A of Section VIII, Division 1 be used in the
design of tubesheets?
Reply: The requirements of the Code do not have specific design rules for determining the
thickness of tubesheets. The provisions of paragraph U-2(g) and/or UG-101 apply. Depending upon the
type of heat exchanger, the designer may apply parts of the rules in other paragraphs of the Code
including UG-47 and Appendix A.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Scope - Gate Valves
File: BC78-726
Question: Is a gate valve which is bolted to the discharge opening of a steam jacketed pressure
vessel considered to be within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. Such a valve is outside of the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 and is not considered
to be part of the pressure vessel [see U-1(c)(5) and U-1(e)(1)(c)] . The applicable piping codes should be
consulted for the requirements for construction and installation.
File: BC78-269
Question: Do the requirements of UG-36(e) Section VIII. Division 1 apply to reducer sections
which have been formed by swaging down the larger diameter section with no weld joint at the larger
end?
Reply: Yes, the requirements of UG-36(e) may be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UF-7, SA-649
File: BC78-727
Question: Is it inside the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 to fabricate rolls for corrugating
paper machinery in accordance with SA-649 and have it Code stamped?
Reply: The requirements of UF-7 of Section VIII, Division 1 call for SA-649 material to be used
in fabrication of rolls used for corrugating paper machinery along with the rules of construction in Section
VIII, Division 1.
Subject-. Section VIII, Division 1, UW-51(a)
File: BC78-740
Question: Under the provisions of UW-51(a)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1, is it required that
radiographs which represent the final acceptable vessel welds be retained for a period of five years if this
vessel is exported to a country which also requires the same radiographs?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Case 1205-5
File: BC78-756
Question (1): Under what conditions may special integrally forged pressure vessels, Section VIII,
Division 1 constructed of carbon and alloy steel forging conforming to SA-372 using an allowable stress
value equal to one-third of the specified minimum tensile strength be used for storage of natural gas
assuming that the additional requirements specified in Code Case 1205-5 are met?
Reply (1): The only service restrictions which could apply can be found under UW-2 of Section
VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): Is there any necessity to make a distinction between flammable or nonflammable gases?
Reply (2): No,
Interpretation: `VIII-78-149
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-41
File: BC78-460
Question (1): You plan to qualify per Section VIII, UCL-41 for welding clad plate on an integrally clad
plate (SA-264), 20 mm thick made up of 17 mm of SA-516 Gr. 70 and 3 mm of TP 316 L. What range of
thickness is qualified by this procedure test under Section IX?
Reply (1): UCL-41(a)(2) states the thickness of “QW 451 shall apply to total thickness of clad
plate." Therefore the 2t rule applies to 20 mm and the range qualified per Section IX would be 5 mm to
40 mm.
Question (2): If the clad plate in Question (1) had 16 mm base plate thickness and 8 mm clad thickness,
what would the thickness range qualified be for
(a) total thickness?
(b) clad plate thickness?
Reply (2):
(a) 5 mm to 48 mm.
(b) Although not specifically addressed it would follow that a liberal thickness tolerance, such as
·5 mm to 16 mm thickness of cladding, would be qualified.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, NDE Level I Evaluators
File: BC78-728
Question: Is it permissible to allow NDE Level I personnel to make specific evaluations under
Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, if the specific acceptance criteria are defined in written instructions and
further, that the limitations are described in the written procedure?
Reply: Yes, it is the intent of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 to allow NDE Level I personnel to
make evaluations with the restrictions outlined in your question.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, U-1(c)(5) and A-121(e), Flexible Metal Hose
File: BC78-478
Question: Can flexible metal hose assemblies be constructed under the requirements of Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that metal flexible hose assemblies are considered as
piping components; and as such, as defined in U-1(c)(5) and A-121(e), they are not within the scope of
Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2. Neither is it proposed to revise these sections, nor to establish a Code
Case to include these items.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 , UW-11(b), Footnote
File: BC78-637
Question (1): Is there a need for a reduction factor on the allowable stress when calculating the
circumferential stress of a seamless shell attached to a flathead with a corner joint as described in Fig.
UW-13.2 sketches (a) through (g) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): There is no reduction factor needed since the seamless shell with the flat head attached by
a Category C corner joint allows the circumferential stress calculation of the shell to be E= 1.0 and
S = 100%.
Question (2): Are the requirements of UW-11(a) satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66, Impact Testing
File: BC78-767
Question: Are there any restrictions inherent in UCS-66(c)(2) for material usage except where
prohibited as in UCS-66(b)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Hydro Test of Field Erected Vessels
File: BC78-290
Question (1): Is it permissible in accordance with one of the methods in U-2(i) of Section VIII,
Division 1 to hydrotest the completed vessel in the shop, cut the vessel in half, reweld the girth joint in
the field and then hydrotest the field weld only by use of a half pipe as a test ring welded to the vessel
shell in lieu of retesting (hydrostatic or pneumatic) the whole vessel and then apply the U symbol?
Reply (1): No. UG-99 and UG-100 provide only for hydrostatic or pneumatic test of the entire
vessel.
Question (2): Is it permissible, in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, to construct (including
hydrostatic or pneumatic testing) a vessel in the shop including stamping with the "U" Symbol. The
vessel would then be cut in half, rewelded in the field, and the field weld only would be tested by use of a
half pipe as a test ring welded to the vessel shell in lieu of retesting the whole vessel?
Reply (2): The Code is applicable to a vessel up to and including the stamping of the vessel. Any
modifications, alternations, or repairs to a stamped vessel must be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the jurisdiction where the vessel is to be located.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32 and UW-12
File: BC78-774
Question: May a seamless hemispherical head complying with UG-32(f) of Section VIII, Division 1
with a weld efficiency from Table UW-12 of E = 0.90 be permitted to have the minimum required
thickness reduced by using, E = 1.0 in areas of the head other than the head-to-shell joint?
Reply: No. The minimum required thickness of the head after forming, exclusive of corrosion
allowance, must be based on E = lowest efficiency of any joint in the head, and for hemispherical heads
this includes head-to-shell joint. See UG-32(a) and definition of E in UG-32(c) of Section VIII, Division
1.
File: BC78-668
Question (1): May SA-403 standard pipe fittings fabricated by welding under tile dimensional
requirements of ANSI B16.9 be radiographed and examined by the parts manufacturer and furnished to
the vessel manufacturer without a Partial Data Report if the radiographs are also furnished?
Reply (1): No. (See Preamble of SA-403)
Question (2): May A403 standard pipe fittings fabricated by welding under the dimensional
requirements of ANSI B16.9 be radiographed and examined by the parts manufacturer and furnished to
the vessel manufacturer without a Partial Data Report if the radiographs are also furnished?
Reply (2): Yes. (See UG-11)
Question (3): Can A403 standard pipe fittings under the dimensional requirements of B16.9 be
radiographed and examined by the parts manufacturer and furnished to the vessel manufacturer Without a
Partial Data Report if the radiographs are not furnished?
Reply (3): No. Partial Data Reports are required. (See UG-11)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11, Weld Caps
File: BC78-745
Question: May weld caps, as called out in UG-11(a)(1), produced per SA-234 or SA-403 and
marked in accordance with UG-93 and UG-94 and complying with ANSI B16.9 be used as a formed end
closure head on a pressure vessel?
Reply: The Preface of Material Specifications SA-234 arid SA-403 outline that these materials
are intended for Section III construction. They are not intended for Section VIII construction. It is
suggested that ASTM Standards A403 and A234 could be used and would meet the intent of UG-11(a)(1)
of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-120(c), UG-116(i), AS-120, and AS-310; Partial
Data Reports
File: BC78-749
Question (1): A vessel Manufacturer at site "A" receives fabricated parts from his facility at site "B".
Under these conditions may these parts be furnished without parts stamping of Partial Data Reports U-2
or A-2 under the provisions of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the Quality Control System of the vessel Manufacturer outlines the method
of control, including applicable documentation and procedure, to be used to produce the vessel and the
Manufacturer does have a contract with the same inspection agency at Location A and B.
Question (2). May the Partial Data Report U-2 or A-2 Form be used under Section VIII, Divisions 1
and 2 to document more than one part to be incorporated into a vessel?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 do not prohibit the documentation of more than one part
on a Partial Data Report U-2 or A-2 Form.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UNF-23.3; Maximum Allowable Stress Values in
Tension for Nonferrous Boltings
File: BC78-734
Question: In general, allowable stress values for bolting, are lower than those for plates, pipe, and
tubes, or rods and bars of same materials. Maximum allowable stress values in tension for high nickel
boltings have been revised in Table UNF-23. May we assume that the reason why these revisions have
been made although material specifications have not been revised, is reliable technical data on these
materials have been developed and come to be available after previous issuance of the Code?
Reply: The requirements of Appendix P, UA-500(4)(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 explains the
reasoning for the stress criteria in Table UNF-23 for bolting material. Note that the higher stress values
for certain materials are not recommended for the design of flanges and other strain sensitive applications.
Bolting is considered a strain sensitive application.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99(b) and Section I
File: BC78-737
Question: Why are the requirements in UG-99(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 for obtaining the
Hydrostatic test pressure different from the requirements outlined in PG-99.1 of Section I?
Reply: Due to the evolution of Sections I and VIII, Division 1, the requirements for obtaining the
hydrostatic test pressure have been different in both Code Books. The requirements in UG-99(b) are
correct, and should be used when testing Section VIII, Division 1 vessels.
File: BC78-775
Question: Is a snubber (pulsation damper) constructed entirely of standard piping components and
installed as part of the piping in an installation required to be ASME Code stamped?
Reply: In accordance with U-1(c)(5), components of a piping system, such as snubbers, are
excluded from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 provided "that pressure containing parts of such
components are generally recognized as piping components or accessories."
As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 , Scope, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that
may be different or more than the Code rules.
File: BC78-819
Question: Can stress calculations for design of supports on a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel be
made with methods outlined in UA-193(a), e.g., BS-5500?
Reply: The references in UA-193 Section VIII, Division 1 are for guidance only; maximum
allowable stress calculations cannot exceed the limits as given in UG-23(a). Also see footnote 8 of UG-
23(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1 and UG-28; Jacketed Vessels
File: BC78-666
Question (1): Assuming that the jacket and inner vessel are independent pressure chambers, is Section
VIII, Division 1 applicable for jackets of vessels which have a jacket pressure below 15 psig?
Reply (1): The jacket is excluded from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): Do the requirements of UG-28(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 make the Code applicable
for the shell of the vessel for the case where the shell of a jacketed vessel has full vacuum on the inside
and up to 15 psig pressure in the jacket?
Reply (2): Yes, because the total external pressure on the inner shell is more than 15 psig.
Question (3): If the Code is applicable as a legal document in a jurisdiction, must the vessel be Code
stamped?
Reply (3): Generally the answer would be "Yes." See also footnote 1 to U-1.
Question (4) With regard to the vessels in question (2), must both the shell and jacket be stamped or
can the shell be stamped and not the jacket?
Reply (4): The vessel portion would need to be Code stamped, but not the jacket portion.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56 and UHA-51
File: BC78-850
Question: If a vessel is fabricated using ASTM A387 Grade B material under the provisions of
UCS, and a procedure is qualified by welding A387 Grade B to A240 Grade TP321 using 309Cb weld
metal, is it then a requirement to impact test the weld metal as stated under UHA-51 if the weld is
subjected to PWHT under 1650°F?
Reply: Since one of the materials being welded using 309Cb weld metal is a high alloy, then the
provisions of UHA-51 of Section VIII, Division 1 for impact testing are required.
File: BC78-823
Question: Can a pressure vessel under the provisions of UG-46(f)(7),Section VIII, Division 1, that
is larger than 36 in. I.D. use multiple flanged connections smaller than 15 in. I.D. in lieu of a 11 in. x 15
in. or 10 in. x 16 in. in manhole?
Reply: Not unless the shape or use of the vessel makes a manhole impractical, See UG-46(f)(3)
and UG-46(g)(1).
File: BC78-847
Question: Is it the intent of UG-99(b), Section VIII, Division 1 that the highest ratio of stress values
should be used provided that no other part of the vessel would be subjected to a stress exceeding 90% of
the material yield strength?
Reply: The requirements of UG-99(b) call for the minimum hydrostatic test pressure to be 1 1/2
MAWP multiplied by the lowest ratio of stress values.
The requirements of UG-99(b), however, do say that Section VIII, Division 1 does not specify an
upper limit for hydrostatic test pressure.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85
File: BC78-849
Question (1): Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-85 that simulation of postweld heat
treatment of mechanical test coupons be performed (either by the mill or the vessel manufacture) on P-
No. 1, Group No. 1 or 2 materials which are to be postweld heat treated during fabrication per UCS-56?
Reply (1) No. See requirements under UCS-85(e) of Section VIII, Division 1
Question (2) Should such a test be performed on a coupon taken from a vessel so heat treated, where
the test results show a reduction of tensile strength below that stated by the material specification in
Section II and as reported on the original mill test report, would the vessel be in compliance with Section
VIII, Division 1 by reason of Section VIII, Division 1 acceptance of the fact the original mill test report
was in compliance with Section II?
Reply (2): Yes; however, a Designer should give consideration to results and service condition for
the vessel and be responsible for the use of such material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(i)(1)
File: BC79-15
Question: Is it the intent of UG-84(i)(1), Section VIII, Division 1 to allow welding a production test
plate (for a Category A weld) prior to waiting until the first longitudinal weld is made with the test plate
used as a run-off tab?
Reply: It is the intent of the Code to require the test plate to be a run-off tab of the longitudinal
joint. Where it is impractical, for example, using a seamless shell, then a separate test production test
plate can be made. This should not be interpreted so as to avoid the use of the run-off tab because of any
other problem.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-35
File: BC79-41
Question: Is concavity in the root of a weld considered to be the lack of preparation and how do you
determine by radiographic examination the amount of internal concavity in the root of a weld?
Reply: The indication of concavity in a radiograph does not constitute incomplete penetration as
referenced in UW-51(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1. The extent of concavity in the root of a weld that
is not visible by visual inspection is determined by film density and may require multiple exposures. The
extent of concavity can further be verified by thickness readings utilizing ultrasonic equipment.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2
File: BC79-16
Question: If a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel contains two independent pressure chambers
of which one chamber is for a special service, such as lethal service, must the independent chamber which
is not in the special service also comply with the special requirements such as those of UW-2(a)?
Reply: As covered in UG-19(a), the independent chamber which is not in a special service, such
as lethal service, need not comply with the special requirements such as those of UW-2(a). However, if
there are common parts between the two chambers they must satisfy the special requirements such as
those of UW-2(a).
Also see UG-116(d), (k), and (l) concerning marking and UG-120(b) and (d) concerning data
reports.
File: BC78-560
Question: Can the exemption under U-1(c)(6) also include water solutions of calcium and sodium
chloride and water solution of ethylene and propylene glycol?
Reply: The Code does not prohibit the use of additives in the water. To clarify this point a
revision was made to U-1(c)(6) by adding a footnote to the word water, which reads: "The water may
contain additives provided the flash point of the aqueous solution at atmospheric pressure is 185 F or
higher."
This revised wording has gone through initial acceptance. If after public review there are no
objections, then the revision will be published in the Summer 1979 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1
for inclusion into the Code.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.1 and UW-33(b)
File: BC79-35
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, that tolerances specified in Fig. UW-13.1
apply to the attachment of elliptical and torispherical heads to cylindrical shells, whereas the tolerances
specified in UW-33 apply to the attachment of hemispherical heads to cylindrical shells?
Reply: It is the intent of the provisions in UW-13 as well as in Fig. UW-13.1 to allow for the
attachment of hemispherical heads to cylindrical shells among the other formed heads referenced. As a
point of clarification the requirements under UW-13 and Fig. UW-13.1 apply to design methods, whereas
the requirements under UW-33 apply to fabrication methods.
Interpretation: VIII 79-21
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-79(d)
File: BC79-83
Question (1): Is it the intent of UCS-79(d) in Section VIII, Division 1, which concerns itself with
formed shells and heads, to reference UCS-56 for heat treatment requirements when UCS-56 deals with
postweld heat treatment?
Reply (1) Yes, The reference to UCS-56 in UCS-79(d) is correct. The intent is to use the
requirements of UCS-56 as a tempering heat treatment for the formed shell and heads.
Question (2) Does the exemption of no heat treatment in Note 2A, Table UCS-56, apply to cold
formed shell or head less than 1-1/4 in. thick?
Reply (2) No. The requirement of UCS-79(d)(2)(e) mandates that heat treatment must be performed
on parts exceeding 5/8 in.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix VI, UA-71
File: BC79-84
Question: Under the provisions of Appendix VI, UA-71 of Section VIII, Division 1, may a
Manufacturer delegate responsibility of witnessing the reading of the Jaeger Type 2 standard chart to
plant personnel, such as the Quality Control Inspector or Plant Manager?
Reply: The requirements of Appendix VI, UA-71 Section VIII, Division 1 do not address the
question of who is to witness the reading of the Jaeger Type 2 chart, or what his qualifications must be.
Therefore the Manufacturer should specify his designee to witness the NDE requirement in his Quality
Control Manual, and this shall be acceptable to the Inspector. This can be done by demonstrating that the
designee is qualified to perform this operation.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-5 and UHT-6
Date Issued: March 30,1979
File: BC79-92
Question: Is impact testing under UHT-5(c), a requirement for material (SA-517 Grade E) to be
used in vessel construction under Part UHT when the vessel is to be insulated and the vapor pressure of
the enclosed gas mixture is dependent on the atmospheric temperature conditions?
Reply: The requirements of UHT-5(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 call for steels referenced in
Table UHT-23 to be tested for notch toughness. This test can be made at a temperature corresponding
with the vapor pressure for materials where the vapor pressure of the gas is dependent on the atmospheric
temperature conditions.
This requirement is independent of whether the vessel is insulated. For temperatures below -
20 F for SA-517 material the requirements of UHT-6(b) call for, in addition to Charpy tests, drop weight
tests.
File: BC79-147
Question: When rings are welded using flash butt welding and the material is P-No. 1 Group No. 1,
is it mandatory to require postweld heat treatment under UCS-56 and radiographic examination under
UCS-57 of Section VIII, Division 1 for material above 1 1/4 in. thick?
Reply: The material of P-No. 1 Group No. 1 for the size referenced need not be postweld heat
treated as long as the requirements of Note (2)(a) of Table UCS-56 are met. Radiographic examination is
required under the provisions of UCS-57 of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Forms U-1 and U-1A and Table UA-1020
File: BC79-159
Question: What is the intended dimension to be recorded for length in item 6, as referenced in Note
(22) of Table UA-1020, of U-1 and U-1A Forms of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: It is the intent of Note (22) of Table UA-1020 to record the length of the circular shell
from weld seam to weld seam, and enter that dimension in item 6 of Forms U-1 and U-1A of Section
VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Transitions at Fittings UG-44(a) and UW-9(c)
File: BC79-88
Question: UG-44 of Section VIII, Division 1 lists ANSI Standard B16.9 Wrought Steel Buttwelding
Fittings as acceptable for use; however, UW-9(c) which may be invoked by UW-8, limits a transition
taper to no less than three to one. Therefore are the words "vessel parts" in UW-8 intended to invoke the
requirements of UW-9(c) for B16.9 fittings, or are B16.9 fittings permitted per se?
Reply: Regarding UG-44(a), the fittings are acceptable insofar as the design details and pressure/
temperature ratings go except that UW-9(c) requires a transition with a 3:1 slope between sections of
unequal thickness. This slope may be partly or totally across the weld. (see Fig. UW-9).
The subject is being reviewed as part of another inquiry, and the rules may be changed at some
future date.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UA-48, Circular Flanges
File: BC79-155
Question: May optional type flanges in Fig. UA-48 be calculated and designed as an integral type
without the weld extending through the flange thickness t as shown in Figure UA-48, sketch (7) if design
conditions exceed values in UA-48(a)(3) for go, B/go,, P, or operating temperature?
Reply: Figure UA-48 of Section VIII, Division 1, sketches (5) through (7) shall be calculated as
integral unless they meet the requirements of UA-48(a)(3). If they do meet those requirements, they may
be calculated as loose. If the weld details of Fig. UA-48, sketches (8) through (9) are met, the flange may
be considered integral.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-37; Reinforced Opening in ERW
File: BC79-152
Question: In the case of reinforcement calculations on shells fabricated of SA-53 ERW Pipe, would
it be permissible that in the calculation of the value (tr), i.e., the required thickness of a seamless shell per
UG-37 of Section VIII, Division 1, that the maximum allowable stress value of SA-53 seamless pipe
would be allowed to be used provided the nozzle was cut in the seamless part of the ERW pipe?
Reply: UG-37 of Section VIII, Division 1 does permit the required shell thickness which is used
in the reinforcement calculations to be based on E = 1.0, and neither the opening nor the reinforcement
may lie in the weld when the E= 1.0 is used. See also the definitions of E1 in UG-40.
You are reminded of the requirements of UW-14, which may be applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Weld Ells Made by Bending Pipe
File: BC79-161
Question: Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1 to fabricate standard weld ells by bending
pipe instead of ones fabricated by forging?
Reply: Whether they are long radius or short radius weld ells, bends may be made either by
bending pipes or by the forging process. However, in the formed shape, the fittings must meet the
materials specification. Sometimes this is more difficult to do with an elbow made from a bent pipe than
a forged elbow. (For example, see ASTM A-234 for requirements for some fittings.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11(a)(5)(b)
Date Issued May 24,1979
File: BC79-205
Question: If we have Category A longitudinal welds that are spot radiographed to which is attached
a seamless head by Category B joint, and if this Category B joint is partially radiographed, as per UW-
11(a)(5)(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, do we need to apply a stress reduction factor as per UW-12(b)?
Reply: There would be no need for the stress reduction due to the fact that the seamless head
would satisfy the requirements of UW-11(a) of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11(a)
Date Issued: June 15,1979
File: BC79-243
Question(1): A vessel has two shell courses and segmented hemispherical heads attached at the ends.
All longitudinal and circumferential welds in these parts are butt welds. A nozzle is attached to the shell
by a corner joint (Category D) and has a ring flange attached to it by a corner joint (Category C). To
satisfy the requirements for full radiography under UW-11(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, is it necessary
for the circumferential butt welds in the vessel to be either partially or 100% radiographed?
Reply (1): It is assumed that all the seams in the heads and shell courses of the vessel are Category
A butt joints, except for the girth seam between the two shell courses which is assumed to be a Category
B butt joint. Thus, all of the Category A welds are required to be 100% radiographed, and the Category B
joint shall be partially radiographed as a minimum.
Question (2): Is the Category D joint described in Question (1) required to be radiographed?
Reply (2): No. Corner joints are not required to be radiographed.
Question (3): Is it necessary for the Category C joint described to be radiographed?
Reply (3): No. Since the Category C joint is not a butt weld, then no radiography is required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2 and Fig. UW-13.1, Sketch (f)
File: BC79-247
Question: A two chambered vessel is constructed with an intermediate head attachment per Fig.
UW-13.1 sketch (f) as the pressure barrier between the chambers. May the chamber exerting pressure on
the convex side of this head be used in lethal service per UW-2 when at the same time the other chamber
is not?
Reply: No. The intermediate head attachment does not satisfy the requirements of UW-2(a)(2)
which specifies that such a Category B joint should be of Type No. (1) or (2) of Table UW-12.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2; Interpolation of Stress Values
File: BC78-439
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 in allowing interpolation of stress values
by the notes in the stress tables in Division 1 and AD-130 in Division 2 to mean arithmetical
interpolation, or one by conducting a smooth curve?
Reply: The reference in the Section VIII (and other Code Sections) allowable stress tables to
"interpolation" to determine values at intermediate temperatures refers to straight line interpolation.. This
interpretation is essential so that all users of the Code will arrive at consistent answers for a particular set
of conditions.
The subcommittees which evaluate data and recommend the Code allowable stress values may
use a number of curve-fitting techniques in their evaluations, but the values subsequently tabulated in the
Code are intended to be used with straight-line interpolation.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16(g)(3)(a)
File: BC79-266
Question (1): What is the proper definition of the thickness of the vessel wall as stated in the
requirements of UW-16(g)(3)(a)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): The definition of the vessel wall thickness would be the nominal thickness less corrosion
allowance.
Question (2): Do the rules of UW-16(g)(3)(a)also apply to the attachment of internally threaded fittings
to flat covers?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC79-265
Question: UW-52(b) requires, as a minimum, that one spot be radiographed in each 50 feet of
welding. It follows that a vessel having 160 ft of butt welds will require 4 spot radiographs to satisfy
Code requirements. If one radiograph has rejectable indications, should the distance represented by this
radiograph be 50 ft or 40 ft?
Reply: UW-52 requires a minimum of one radiograph for each 50 ft of welding. Should the
manufacturer choose to perform additional radiographs, the number of feet represented is reduced. In the
above example the number of feet represented by each radiograph would be 40 ft. The two additional
radiographs required should be taken within that length. Should either of these two radiographs include
rejectable indications, the entire 40 ft of the weld represented shall be rejected. See UW-52(d)(2)(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-79(a)(1)
File: BC79-245
Question: Is it the intent of UHT-79(a)(1), Section VIII, Division 1 that formed shell sections and
heads shall be postweld heat treated at the temperature shown in Table UHT-56 regardless of thickness if
the 3% strain is exceeded?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UCS-56 and AF-415
Date Issued: July 6,1979
File: BC79-274
Question: Are the PWHT procedures which were qualified using the 600 F temperature for
charging a furnace valid for use with the 800 F in UCS-56 and AF-415 Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2
without requalification?
Reply: Yes. The values in UCS-56 and AF-415 are maximums.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-80(a) and UG-79(b)
File: BC79-298
Question: Is it the intent of UG-80(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 to allow flat spots, as referenced in
UG-79-(b), including those adjoining longitudinal joints in cylindrical vessels made of plate, when the
difference between the maximum and minimum inside diameters at any cross section does not exceed 1%
of the nominal diameter at the cross section under consideration?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-3 and Table UW-12
File: BC79-246
Question: A longitudinal baffle is inserted perpendicularly into a longitudinal Category A weld of a

shell in a heat exchanger. The baffle is seal welded on the first pass and the remainder of the passes
complete the longitudinal seam. What is the joint efficiency of the weld?
Reply: A weld as described is not acceptable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-34
File: BC79-321
Question: Is it required to postweld heat treat a fabricated pressure vessel in clad steel, base metal
of ASTM A285 Grade C (21 mm thick) and cladding of ASTM A240 Grade TP405 (2.78 mm thick)
under the rules of UCL-34, Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: It is preferred that material be ordered, produced, and documented to an ASME material
specification under Section II of the Code.
No postweld heat treatment need be performed due to the fact that the material is below the
minimum size limitation for P-No. 1 material as listed in Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1,
provided the electrode used is either austenitic or nonair-hardening nickel-chromium-iron electrode. [See
UCL-34(b)].
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(e)(4)
File: BC79-345
Question: Under the provisions of U-1(e)(4), is a strain gage level indicator attached to a vessel
beyond the first sealing surface exempted from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1, or must it be
considered a part of the containment, and be designed with material acceptable under Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: Excluding relief devices, any gage or instrument attached to a vessel beyond the first
sealing surface is excluded from the Scope of the Code and does not need to comply with Code
requirements including Code acceptable material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(e) and UG-90(c)(1)
File: BC79-105
Question (1): Is it the intent of U-2(e) of Section VIII, Division 1, that the Authorized Inspector shall
check and accept (by signing the U-1 Form) the accuracy of the design calculations with respect to the
proper choice of applicable design formulas, stress values for materials used, and mathematics?
Reply(1): U-2(e) requires the Inspector to verify that the applicable calculations have been made
and requires that any questions raised by the Inspector be resolved. The Inspector is not required to check
the calculations.
Question (2): Is the intent of U-2(e) in any way modified when Section VIII, Division 1 does not
provide rules covering all the design details as per U-2(g)?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-8(b)(5)(b)
File: BC79-328
Question (1): Is the requirement of UG-8(b)(5)(b), Section VIII, Division 1 met if each integrally
finned tube is tested after it has been assembled in a tube bundle by applying pressure externally to all of
the tubes in the bundle at the same time and examining for leakage out of the end of each tube?
Reply (1): No. An internal test is required and each tube is to be tested before installation .
Question (2): Is the requirement of UG-8(b)(5)(b), Section VIII, Division 1 met if each integrally
finned tube is tested after it has been assembled in a tube bundle, by applying pressure internally to all of ,
the tubes in the bundle at the same time, and checking for leakage through shell connections during an
extended test of at least 30 min.?
Reply (2): No. Each tube is to be individually tested before installation to permit complete
examination for leakage.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2(i)
File: BC79-350
Question: Would the use of the method of attachment shown in Fig. UW-13.2(i) of Section VIII,
Division 1, where the tubeplate is machined to provide a back for the weld, be construed as a joint not
having a back-up strip?
Reply: Yes .The machining of the tubeplate is the backing for the weld in Fig. UW-13.2(i).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2(a), Footnote 10
File: BC79-361
Question: Under the rules of UW-2(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, including footnote 10, is it
required that both the shell side and channel side of a shell and tube heat exchanger be designed for lethal
service if only one side is designated as lethal service, regardless of whether the tubes in the bundle are
seamless or butt welded without the addition of filler metal?
Reply: No. The generalized reply to your question is as follows: An independent chamber as
covered in UG-19(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 which is not in a special service, such as lethal service,
need not comply with the special requirements such as those of UW-2(a). However, if there are common
parts between the two chambers they must satisfy the special requirements such as those of UW-2(a) Also
see UG-116(d), (k), and (1) concerning marking and UG-120(b) and (d) concerning Data Reports.
Regarding the tubes which are a common part:

(a) If they are seamless, the special requirements applicable to UW-2(a) do not apply to the
tubes, and, in as far as the tubes influence the requirements, noncommon parts of the
independent chamber which is not in lethal service need not satisfy the requirements applicable
to UW-2(a).
(b) Footnote 10 to UW-2(a) is a special provision under which butt welded tubes may be used
provided both the shell and channel sides satisfy the requirements applicable to UW-2(a).
File: BC79-354
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UCS-85(b) Section VIII, Division 1 to

fabricate a vessel from P-No. 4 plate material and stress relieve it at 640 C or 700 C when the plate was
tempered at 680 C?
Reply: Plate material which has been tempered at 680 C by the mill should not be stress
relieved at any temperature above that. Care must be taken to assure that the tensile properties of the
material are not altered by too high a stress relieving temperature.
ATTENTION
interpretation sent to the inquirer.
Correction Issued: February 15, 1980
Reply: Plate material which has been tempered at 680 C by the mill may be stress relieved at a
temperature above that, provided that test coupons for the plate reflect all heat treatments that the material
is subjected to including postweld heat treatments.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-18 Studding Nozzles
File: BC79-40
Question: Is it permissible to fabricate studding nozzles: the nozzle would be designed under the
rules of UHT-18 Section VIII, Division 1 and the reinforcement would be integral within the studding
flange body, made from SA-517 plate material for installation in tanks made from SA-517 steel?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not specifically limit the fabrication of nozzles to forgings;
therefore, if the weld joint is made readily examinable, a studding nozzle as shown in Fig. UW-16.1
sketch (t) could be used and made as long as all of the minimum thickness and other requirements for
studded connections are met, such as those given in UG-12 and UG-43(d) of Section VIII, Division' 1.
Also the provisions of UHT-57(b) and UHT-83 must be met.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UCS-56(f) and AF-420
File: BC79-307
Question: May welds be made for the following combinations of materials in all thicknesses for
both butt and fillet joints using ENI Cr Fe 3 electrodes of SFA 5.11 without additional postweld heat
treatment for those parts of the vessel which already received postweld heat treatment in accordance with
UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1 and AF-420 of Section VIII, Division 2?
P-No. 1 to P-No. 1 P-No. 1 to P-No. 3, P-No. 4, P-No. 5

P-No. 3 to P-No. 3 P-No. 3 to P-No. 4, P-No. 5
P-No. 4 to P-No. 4 P-No. 4 to P-No. 5
P-No. 5 to P-No. 5
Reply: No. The requirements of UCS-56(f) 1n Section VIII, Division 1 and AF-420 1n Section
VIII, Division 2 apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11(a) and UW-52
File: BC79-368
Question (1): If a vessel is to be examined under the requirements of UW-52 of Section VIII, Division
1, does the exemption in UW-11(a)(4) and (a)(5)(b) for small connections apply?
Reply (1): No. The requirements of UW-52 are not based on weld joint location, but solely on
examination of every 50 ft increment of the butt welded joints.
Question (2): When the vessel sections and heads to which nozzles are attached are covered by UW-
11(a)(5), what requirements shall be applied to the Category A, B, and C of the welds in small nozzles?
Reply (2): Category A, B and C butt welds are required to be fully radiographed when the rules of
UW-11(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 are applicable, except when Category B and C butt welds meet the
exemption of UW-11(a)(5)(b).
,Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-51
File: BC79-436
Question: Do weld metal impact tests in accordance with UHA-51 of Section VIII, Division 1
require lateral expansion measurements as referenced in UG-84(c)(4)(b)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-34(d) and Fig UG-34 sketch (g)
File: BC79-435
Question (1): Is it a requirement of UG-34(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 that in referencing sketch (g)
of Figure UG-34 that a full penetration weld is required?
Reply (2): No. The provisions of UG-34(d) call out the requirements for weld size tw sketch (g) and
state that the weld depth need not exceed the head thickness t. The sketch (g) already shows that the weld
dimension tw may be less than head thickness t provided tw 2tr and tw 1.25ts.
(See errata in volume 10 page 116)
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UG-45 and Appendix 11, UA-48
File: BC79-238
Question (1): Under the provisions of UA-48(a)(3) and Fig. UA-48 sketches (8), (8a), and (8b) of
Section VIII, Division 1. May optional type flanges be fabricated from flat plate, burning the ring? Grain
orientation will be the same as for flat covers, flat heads or tubesheets shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches
(h) to (l).
Reply (1): Material requirements for flanges are contained in UA-46. The special requirements for
fabricated hubbed flanges are given in UA-46(d). Since your inquiry has no description as to whether or
not the flanges have hubs and Fig. UA-48 sketches (8), (8a), and (8b) do permit hubbed and hubless
flanges, you will have to assure yourself that UA-46 has been met.
Question (2): Under the provisions of UG-45 of Section VIII, Division 1 in nozzles using welding neck
flanges, must the schedule of the flange be the same as the schedule used for the tube? Is it possible to
use a different schedule for flanges provided that pressure and corrosion allowances are satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes, provided that the abutting sections and welded joint meet the rules for a tapered
transition of UW-9(c), if they are applicable.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UA-46(d) and Fig. UA-48
Date Issued: August 13,1978
File: BC79-309
Question (1): Is it permissible to simply cut a ring from plate and use it in the configurations of Fig.
UA-48, sketches (7), (8), (8a), (8b), and (9) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1) Yes, as long as the fabricated flange does not have an integral hub as part of it. For
fabricated hubbed flanges, the rules of UA-46(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 shall be followed.
Question (2): Does the fillet weld connecting the flange and outside of nozzle constitute a hub as
referred to in UA-46(d) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes. [See Fig. UA-48, sketch(7) for dimensions.]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16(g)(5)
File: BC79-329
Question: Can we interpret the wording of UW-16(g)(5) to mean that when all the conditions in
UW-16(g)(5)(a),(b),(c), and (d) of Section VIII, Division 1 are satisfied that no additional reinforcement
other than that inherent in the construction is required?
Reply: Yes. The weld size must still be determined but cannot be less than a 3/32 in. leg.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UA-48 Sketch (5)
Date issued: August 17, 1979
File: BC79-388
Question: In Fig, UA-48 sketch (5) of Section VIII, Division 1, what is the value of h and what are
the values for F and Vin Fig. UA-51.2 and UA-51.3?
Reply: For flanges without hubs, the value of h = 0 and h/ho = 0; also g1 = go or g1/go = 1. In
using Fig. UA-51.2, for g1/go = 1, for all values of h/h0, F = 0.908920. In using Fig. UA-51.3, for, g1/go =
1, for all values of h/ho, V= 0.550103.
File: BC79-348
Question: In designing for earthquake loading, should impact loads be used to determine design
loads used in obtaining the earthquake loads under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The requirements of UG-22 of Section VIII, Division 1 list some of the loadings which
shall be considered in the design of a vessel. Included are impact and earthquake loads. However, this
Division of Section VIII does not contain rules on how to consider every loading. When no rules are
given, then the requirements of U-2(g) shall be followed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Use of SA-36 Material
File: BC79-463
Question: Are there any restrictions on the use of SA-36 material in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The only restrictions on the use of SA-36 material is on plate called out in UCS-6(b) and
specifically UCS-6(b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1. These restrictions prohibit the use of such plate
material where strength welding is applied and only for heads, shells, and nozzles which exceed 5/8, in, in
thickness. There is no restriction on the use of SA-36 bar stock.
File: None
Question: At present, only copper alloy 655 is included under SB-315, and this material is no longer
available on the market in the form of tubing for the manufacture of couplings. However, both copper
alloy 651 and copper alloy 655 are included under SB-98. Is it permissible to use copper alloy 651 in the
form of tubing for the manufacture of threaded couplings for welding into Section VIII, Division 1
vessels?
Reply: Yes, providing the requirements of UG-15 are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, ASTM-A182, Grade 5 Flanges Under Provisions of UG-11 and
UG-44
File: BC79-8
Question: ANSI Standard B16.5, Steel Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings, 1977 Edition, does not
include ASTM-A182, Grade 5 forgings but this material is included in ANSI Standard B16.34, Steel
Valves, 1977 Edition, with pressure-temperature ratings given in Table 2-1.12A for standard class valves,
flanged and buttwelding end. Under the provisions of UG-11(a) and UG-44, Section VIII, Division 1,
may a flange made of ASTM-A182, Grade 5 and otherwise complying with B16.5 be used at the
pressure-temperature ratings of Table 2-12A of ANSI B16.34?
Reply: Yes.
In a reply dated October 4, 1978, the ANSI B16 Committee indicated that ASTM A-182, Grade 5
material may be used in B16.5 flanges at the pressure-temperature ratings of Table 2-1.12A of ANSI
B16.34. This interpretation is acceptable under the provisions of UG-11(a) and UG-44, Section VIII,
Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Clamp Connections
File: BC79-472
Question: Is it permissible to use triclamp ferrules which can be used with a quick opening type
clamp for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: The Committee is assuming that the fittings will be attached to nozzles and used to
connect piping to the vessel. Based on this assumption the Committee refers you to U-1(e)(1)(d) of
Section VIII, Division 1 which states that the Code rules terminate at the first sealing surface. This means
that one part of the fitting would have to be made of Code material, and the Code would have no
jurisdiction over other parts of the fitting. In the case of a nozzle even the first sealing surface can be
external to the vessel by terminating it at the weld for attaching that part.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UA-67 Rounded Indications
File BC79-602
Question: Is it a requirement of the provisions in UA-67(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 to include a

line of nonrelevant indications with those relevant aligned rounded indications which have been
determined acceptable?
Reply: The rules of UA-67(b) do not regard any rounded indications which do not exceed the
dimensional limits outlined there as being significant enough for interpretation. Those that do exceed the
dimensional limits are then considered relevant, and only then are used to determine acceptance or
rejection of the radiograph.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Epoxy Paint used as Coating for a Fabricated Tank
File: BC79-642
Question: Is it permissible under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to coat the internal surface of
a tank, fabricated under the requirements of Section VIII, with an epoxy paint?
Reply: The Code does not prohibit the use of epoxy paint as a coating for a pressure vessel
fabricated under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 as long as all of the applicable requirements of that
Division have been met.
Subject,: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.3
File: BC79-657
Question: In vessels manufactured for lethal service may enclosures be fabricated of forged material
in accordance with the details shown in Fig. UW-13.3, sketch (a) or (b) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided the welded joint is made a Type 1 or 2 joint of Table UW-12.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 and 2, UW-16 and AD-610
File: BC79-507
Question: May a nozzle abutting the vessel wall and attached to the vessel by a full penetration
weld as shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (a) and (b) and in Fig. AD-610.1 sketches (a) and (b) of Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 respectively, be reinforced with a pad on the outside of the vessel where the pad is
attached by welds at the outer edge of the pad and at the nozzle neck periphery? The weld at the outer
edge of the pad shall be a fillet weld and the welds attaching the nozzle neck to the vessel wall and to the
pad shall be full penetration welds.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC79-669
Question: When calculating tr for nozzle reinforcement per UG-40 and UG-37(b)(4)of Section VIII,
Division 1, is it necessary to include the stress reduction factor of 0.8 for no radiography in the
calculation, with E equal to 1 for both a seamless shell and a rolled shell with a Type 1 longitudinal joint?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-79-69 [Same as 80-02 Vol. 7, pg. 106]

Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16 and Fig. UW-16.2 sketch (p)
File: BC79-622
Question: What is the minimum fillet leg size for the attachment of a 2 in. flange-type fitting (as in
Fig. UW-16.2 sketch (p) with the opening in the vessel wall less than the outside diameter of 2 in. pipe
plus 0.75 in.) to a 0.375 in. thick shell under the conditions listed below?
(1) Design pressure = 350 psi.
(2) Corrosion Allowance = 0 in.
(3) The minimum nozzle neck thickness required by UG-45(a) = 0.13475 in. see UW-
16(g)(3)(a)(3)(a) .
(4) The attachment weld throat necessary to satisfy the requirements of UW-18 for the
applicable loadings of UG-22 = 0.0625 in. see UW-16(g)(3)(a)(3)(b)
Reply: The weld throat shall meet the rules given in UW-16(g)(3)(a)(3),and the weld leg shall
meet the rules given in UW-16(g)(3)(a)(4).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2 Sketches (b) and (c)
File: BC79-639
(Same Q. and A. as 80-02 Vol. 7, pg. 105)
Question: Is the joint configuration illustrated in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (b),and (c) of Section VIII,
Division 1 acceptable when used to join side plates in a box header designed for lethal service?
Reply: No. 'The last sentence of the first paragraph of UW-2(a) lists the types of joints which
may be used with various categories of welded joints. The three categories of joints which are used to
join the sides of a box header in lethal service and the type of joint are:
Category A (Longitudinal welded joint) must be Type 1 (butt)
Category B (Circumferential welded joint) must be Type 1 or Type 2 (butt)
Category C same as Category B
Since the joint must be a butt joint, the types shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (b) and (c) are not
permitted for lethal service.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCD-3(a) and 3(b)
File: BC79-640
Question (1): May cast ductile iron of the type listed in Table UCD-23 of Section VIII, Division 1 be
subjected to operating temperatures below that required in UCD-3(a) by utilizing additional criteria,
testing or lowering the pressure rating?
Reply (1): No The requirements of UCS-3(a) specifically limit the use of cast ductile iron to -20 F,
and additional testing would not satisfy any requirements.
Question (2): Under the provisions in UCS-3(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 may the latest edition of
ANSI B16.5 (1977) be used instead of the 1968 version that is referenced?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix II, UA-46(d)
File: BC79-714
Question: Is the following interpretation of UA-46(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to the
1977 Edition?
(1)Hubbed Flanges. Specific requirements are given for the fabrication of hubbed flanges made
from plates.
(2)Hubless Flanges. No special mention is made regarding the fabrication of hubless flanges, such
as types (1), (1a), (7), (8), (8a), (8b), and (9) of Fig. UA-48 types of flanges.
(2.1) We understand that hubless flanges as mentioned on item (2) may be cut from plate as rings and
machined. This way, the original plate surfaces would be perpendicular to the axis of the flange
and not parallel to it, as required for hubbed flanges.
(2.2) The above mentioned hubless flanges may be made up of segments cut from plate, buttwelded
and machined, provided that Section VIII, Division 1 stress-relief and radiography
requirements are complied with.
(2.3) There are no diameter or pressure limitations for hubless flanges fabricated as mentioned under
(2.1) and (2.2) provided they are designed in accordance with applicable rules of Section VIII,
Division 1.
Reply: The above interpretation is correct.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-36(c)(3)(a)
File: BC79-611
Correct Question to read: Question: Would it be permissible under UG-36(c)(3)(a) of Section

VIII, Division 1 that a 2 in., 300 lb. rating long weld. neck inserted into a vessel shell, which would
require a 3.4375 in. hole cutting the shell or head, be classed as an opening requiring reinforcement
according to the rules of UG-37, when in fact the 2 in. long weld neck contains more inherent
reinforcement strength than a 2 in. pipe with 2 3/8 in. outside diameter?
Reply: No. The provisions of UG-36(c)(3) provides for the condition where no reinforcement
calculations need to be made for single openings in vessels not subject to rapid fluctuations in pressure,
and this solely refers to the opening in the vessel. UG-36(c)(3)(a) states the size limitation on that
opening and says that when the connection is welded or brazed, if the vessel is 3/8 in. or less in thickness,
the opening in the vessel may be as large as 3 in. pipe size (3 1/2 in.). If the vessel is over 3/8 in. in
thickness the opening in the vessel may be as large as 2 in. pipe size (2-3/8 in.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Spherically Dished Covers, UA-6
File: BC79-606
Question (1): Would it be acceptable under the requirements of UA-6 of Section VIII, Division 1 to
define L as positive as shown in Fig. UA-6 and negative when the center of curvature of the dish is
outside the vessel; also to define P as negative for external pressure?
Reply (1): The formulas in UA-6 of Section VIII, Division 1 are correct for both internal and
external pressure. Use of + and - signs on L, P, or Mo will give errors. UA-6(c) shall be followed.
Question (2): Is it correct that the definition of Mo in UA-6(b) should say "convex to" and "concave to"
instead of "under external" and "under internal" pressure?
Reply (2): The words in the definition for Mo are correct. The words "concave" and "convex" to
pressure were chosen because it is possible to have pressure of either kind on either side.
Question (3): Is the formula t =5PL/6S good for external as well as internal pressure in UA-6(e)
through (g), and should not UG-32 or UG-33 be used in each case, depending on whether the pressure is
internal or external?
Reply (3): The formula is adaptable for external as well as internal pressure. The opening paragraph
of UA-6(a), in the last sentence states that heads convex to pressure must also meet UG-33.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Coverage of Pressure Vessel Designed Under External Pressure
File: BC79-658
Question: Is a vessel designed for an external pressure of 6 psi included in the Scope of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. See U-1(c)(8); however, such a vessel may be constructed in accordance with the
rules of Section VIII, Division 1. See U-1(h).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Extent of Stress Analysis Required by U-2(g), UG-22, and UG-
23(c)
File: BC79-671
Question: What is the extent of additional stress analysis which shall be performed to comply with
the requirements of U-2(g), UG-22, and UG-23(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The responsibility, the correctness, and the extent of the stress analysis required to satisfy
UG-22, UG-23(c) and U-2(g) belongs to that company which applies the U-stamp to the vessel. The
Code does not evaluate the methods of stress analysis, nor does it specify the areas to be examined other
than those already given in Division 1. The responsibility for the adequacy of the vessel rests with the
vessel manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-85 and UCS-85
File: BC79-700
Question: In the fabrication of a dished end using plate material SA-285 Grade C, SA-515 Grade
70, and SA-516 Grade 70, which is annealed after forming, is it a requirement of UG-85 and UCS-85 of
Section VIII, Division 1 to call for an additional test coupon with our normalizing cycle of the dished
end?
Reply: The requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 do not specifically request annealing;
however, a test coupon would be required if annealing is done.
File: BC79-666
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-11(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 for a parts
manufacturer, who does not hold a Code symbol, to butt weld tubes together in order to furnish "U" tubes
in accordance with his standard to a heat exchanger shop, provided all the requirements of UG-11(c)(2)(3)
and (4) are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SA-285
File: BC79-781
Question: Would the requirements of the "Basis of Purchase" paragraph in SA-285 be satisfied if
the boiler manufacturer listed the ASME designation "ASME SA-278 W78 Grade C" rather than "ASTM
A285-77 Grade C"?
Reply: The requirements of the "Basis of Purchase" sections of the material specifications would
be satisfied by the procedure suggested above.
File: BC79-738
Question: Does the requirement for providing at least one telltale hole for reinforcing plates and
saddles in UW-15(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to reinforcing plates and saddles which are not
associated with nozzles or other connections?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW 12 and UG-116
File: BC79-625
Question (1): Seamless ellipsoidal heads of a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel are attached to a
cylindrical shell having a spot radiographed Type 1, Category A joint by Type 1, Category B joints which
are partially radiographed in accordance with UW-11(a)(5). Longitudinal stresses do not govern for any
part.
For the seamless heads, what joint efficiency and percent of allowable stress shall be used?
Reply (1): The joint efficiency shall be 1.0 (see UG-32) and the percent of allowable stress shall be
100%. [See UW-12(b). Also see UA-265(b).]
Question (2): For the shell of the vessel described in Question (1), what joint efficiency and percent of
allowable stress shall apply?
Reply (2): The joint efficiency shall be 0.85 [see UW-12(b)(and the percent of allowable stress shall
be 100% See UW-12(b). Also see UA-265(g)
Question (3): In accordance with UG-116(f), what markings shall be applied to the vessel to indicate
the degree of radiography?
Reply (3): The marking "RT-4" shall be applied.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, U-1
File: BC79-626
Question: It is desired to fabricate an electric resistance heated water heater that is within the Scope
of Section IV using austenitic stainless steel (SA-240, Type 304 or 316). Since Section IV does not
permit the use of this material, may such a vessel be built and stamped under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. Vessels within the Scope of another Code section should not be constructed in
accordance with Section VIII unless, as for unfired steam boilers, specific provisions are included for
such construction. See U-1(c)(1) and U-1(g).
File: BC79-737
Question (1): Are sketches (g) and (o) of Fig. UW-16.1 full penetration Category D joints which satisfy
the requirements of UW-2(a)(3)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are sketches (g) and (o) of Fig. UW-16.1 butt welded joints which would require full
radiography under the provisions of UW-2(a) and UW-11(a)?
Reply(2): Sketches (g) and (o) of Fig. UW-16.1 do not contain butt welded joints. In Fig. UW-
16.1, only sketches (q-1) through (q-4) illustrate butt welded joints. Also see the definition of a butt joint
in QW-492 of Section IX.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Postweld Heat Treatment Requirements of P-No. 4 and P-No.-5
Materials
File: BC79-615
Question: Is it acceptable under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that when stress relief heat
treatment is required for P-No. 4 and P-No. 5 materials that it be performed at a temperature which
exceeds that used for tempering the base metal?
Reply: UHT-5 (also, UCS-85 for non-quenched-and-tempered carbon and low alloy steels)
mandates that the material test specimens shall be in the final heat treated condition of the end product.
This includes all the mill heat treatments and anticipated heat treatments performed in the fabrication
shop and/or the erection site. This assures that the mechanical properties of the test specimens are
representative of the final, as fabricated, product.
While it is true that postweld heat treating a quenched and tempered material at a temperature
equal to, or higher than, the tempering temperature will result in a reduction of yield and tensile strengths,
the fact remains that this is being anticipated and accounted for by the test specimen heat treatment.
The sequence with which various subcritical (below the lower transformation temperature) heat
treatments are applied to a quenched and tempered material has no effect on the tensile properties of the
material.
Interpretation: VIII-80-02 (Same Q. and A. as 79-70 Vol. 6 pg. 84)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2 Sketches (b) and (c)
File: BC79-639
Question: Is the joint configuration illustrated in Fig. UW-13.2, sketches (b) and (c) of Section VIII,
Division 1 acceptable when used to join side plates in a box header designed for lethal service?
Reply: No. The last sentence of the first paragraph of UW-2(a) lists the types of joints which
may be used with various categories of welded joints. The three categories of joints which are used to
join the sides of a box header in lethal service and the type of joint are:
Category A (longitudinal welded joint) must be Type 1 (butt);
Category B (circumferential welded joint) must be Type 1 or Type 2 (butt);
Category C same as Category B.
Since the joint must be a butt joint, the types shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketches (b) and (c) are not
permitted for lethal service.
Interpretation: VIII-80-03 (Same as 79-69 Vol. 6 pg. 84)

Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UW-16 and Fig. UW-16.2
File: BC79-622
Question: What is the minimum fillet leg, size for the attachment of a 2 in. flange-type fitting (as in
Fig. UW-16.2, sketch (p) with the opening in the vessel wall less than the outside diameter of 2 in. pipe
plus 0.75 in.) to a 0.375 in. thick shell under the conditions listed below?
(a) design pressure = 350 psi;
(b) corrosion allowance = 0 in.;
(c) the minimum nozzle neck thickness required by UG-45(a) = 0.13475 in. [see UW-16(g)(3)-
(a)(3)(a)(;
(d) the attachment weld throat necessary to satisfy the requirements of UW-18 for the applicable
loadings of UG-22 = 0.0625 in. [see UW-16(,g)(3)(a)(3)(b)] .
Reply: The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee does not review nor confirm design
calculations. This is the responsibility of the Code stamp holder. In answer to your specific question, the
weld throat shall meet the rules given in UW-16(,g)(3)(a)(3) and the weld leg shall meet the rules given in
UW-16(g)(3)(a)(4).
File: BC80-5
Question: To what extent should a defective tackweld be removed so to comply with the
requirements in UW-31(c) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: A tackweld found to be defective should be removed flush with the parent metal.
Subject: Section VIII-Division 1, Joint Categories Table UW-12
File: BC79-682
Question (1): What is the joint category and joint efficiency of a nozzle-to-shell joint which is similar
to Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (q-4) of Section VIII Division 1, is a butt joint with a backing strip remaining,
and is fully radiographed?
Reply (1): Since the weld is a nozzle-to-shell weld, it is a Category D joint. Since the weld is fully
radiographed and the backing strip remains, the weld type is Column (a), Type 2, with E = 0.90 of Table
UW-12.
Question (2): What are the joint categories and joint efficiencies of a construction where a ring, is butt
welded into the shell in the region of a nozzle with and without a reinforcing pad. The nozzle is welded
to the inner edge of the ring with a full penetration weld similar to Fig. UW-16.1, sketches (h) and (o)?
All welds are fully radiographed and the backing, strip remains.
Reply (2): The outer weld at the ring-to-shell is a butt joint in the shell and is Category A. Since the
weld is fully radiographed and the backing strip remains, the weld type is Column (a), Type (2), with E =
0.90. The inner welds attaching the nozzle to the ring is a Category D weld. It is a full penetration weld
and not covered by Table UW-12. The categories of the outer and inner welds remain tile same
regardless of whether or not they are covered by a reinforcing pad.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 13, Rectangular Headers
File: BC79-267
Question (1): When calculating membrane stresses on the short and long side plates in Appendix 13 of
Section VIII Division 1 . reference is made to an efficiency factor of 0.8 for welds; however, examples do
not show any weld efficiency in the calculations. Which is correct?
Reply (1): The statement regarding the weld efficiency of E = 0.80 is being removed and is not
appropriate, however, the example is correct because E = 0.80 is not used.
Question (2): Is it correct for the bending stress equations in Appendix 13 to require a weld efficiency
factor?
Reply (2): Weld efficiency factors apply only to butt welds. Efficiency factors also exist for
perforated plates where no welds are present and must be used.
Question (3): In our analysis of tubesheet design, we have discounted the ligament efficiency as being
ineffective as a result of the staying action of the tubes and reinforcing effect of the plugs; therefore, can
the ligament efficiency in the design be set at a value of one, and can a proof test be used as an alternative
to the calculations?
Reply (3): The basis for the equations in Appendix 13 is primarily an elastic analysis which is based
on structural and finite element analyses. Equations are not based on proof tests. Proof tests may give a
variety of results, especially in rectangular vessels where yielding of the corners and ligaments may take
place; and for this reason, formulas were developed.
In those cases where tubes add staying power to the plate, a special analysis may be made
according to U-2(g) for those situations which are not covered by Code formulas.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UCS-66
File: BC79-712
Question (1): Is it permissible to use various acceptable carbon steel plate materials (i.e., SA-515 SA-
285) under the requirements of UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 without impact testing?
Reply (1): Section VIII makes no distinction between the type of carbon steels permitted without
impact tests being required as per UCS-66.
Question (2): Is it permitted to wave-off impact testing flanges on the basis of a temperature-pressure
rating chart which in our case indicates maximum pressure of 275 psi (19.33 kg/cm2) which is greater
than 2.5 X 7.0 = 17.5 kg/cm2?
Reply (2): As long as a flange rating according to the ANSI B16.5-1977 pressure rating is more than
2.5 times the maximum pressure for which the vessel is stamped, the impact tests would not be required.
Question (3): If the impact test requirement is waved-off for flanges in the above context, can we
substitute SA-350 LF2 with SA-105?
Reply (3): Section VIII, Division 1 makes no distinction in the kinds of carbon steels used.
Therefore, the use of SA-105 would not be prohibited by Section VIII, Division 1 where it was not impact
tested according to the provisions of UCS-66.
Interpretation: VIII 80-08

Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-21 and AD-120 Design Pressure
File: BC79-758
Question (1): In designing a vessel according to Section VIII, Division 1 for short time conditions,
since no provisions are made for short time conditions in Section VIII, Division 1, may the criterion of
ANSI B31.3, 302.2.4 be applied?
Reply (1): Since there are no special provisions for consideration of the length of time of operation,
short or otherwise, in Section VIII, Division 1, the vessel design shall meet the requirements of UG-20
and UG-21.
Question (2): In designing a vessel according to Section VIII, Division 2 for short time conditions, may
the criterion of ANSI B31.3, 302.2.4 be applied or shall a fatigue analysis be performed?
Reply (2): In designing a vessel according to Section VIII, Division 2, there is no specific
consideration of time except for that inferred by Table AD-150.1 for certain loads, such as wind load,
which are usually of short time.
Time is not considered in the fatigue evaluation, only the number of various cycles. Each shall be
applied if it is applicable.
File: BC80-1
Question: In the design of a cylindrical pressure vessel for external pressure, where the vessel is of
varying thickness, is it permissible to use an "effective" (weighted-average) thickness in the calculations
under UG-28 and UG-29 of Section VIII, Division 1
Reply: The requirements of UG-28 and UG-29 are based on a uniform wall thickness and are not
adaptable to a varying thickness situation; therefore, the rules of U-2(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 are
applicable.
Interpretation; VIII-80-10
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Welding, of Attachments After the Final Hydrostatic Test, UG-
99(a)
File: BC80-74
Question: May nonpressure attachments be welded to a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel
subsequent to the final hydrostatic test required by UG-99(a) without subsequent hydrostatic testing and
prior to the stamping of the completed vessel?
Reply: No. Section VIII, Division 1 requires that the final hydrostatic test as required by UG-
99(a) be the last operation prior to the stamping of the completed vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Criteria for Using Allowable Stresses
File: BC79-756
Question: Is it permissible under the rules of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 to use the actual tensile
strength value of a material in the design of a vessel instead of the minimum specified tensile strength
given in the stress Tables of Section VIII?
Reply: No. The criteria for designing a vessel shall be based on the allowable stresses given in
Section VIII-Divisions 1 and 2 for the material at the minimum specified tensile strength value given.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Butt Welding. Hubs, Weld Overlay Construction
File: BC79-704
Question: May butt welding hubs of the types shown in Figs. UW-13.3, UW-16.1(q), UHT-18.1,
and UA-48 of Section VIII, Division 1 be constructed of overlayed weld metal provided the base
materials and the weld metal are examined by the ultrasonic, liquid penetrant, and radiographic methods?
Reply: No. Butt welding hubs constructed from weld overlay deposit are not permitted by the
Code.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(g)
File: BC79-760
Question: May inverted flanges be designed per U-2(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 with smaller
openings than one-half of the inside diameter?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not contain specific rules for the design of inverted flanges
therefore, U-2(g) is applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-6(a)
File: BC79-791
Question: Is it permissible under UA-6(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, in calculating the thickness of
the dished portion of a spherical head under external pressure, to use the provisions for hemispherical
heads under UG-33(c)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-704 and UA-706
File: BC79-804 and BC80-2-
Question: Is there a discrepancy in the I, nomenclature for calculating the moment of inertia
between
11, , and I2, and footnote 2 of UA-704 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. The method of calculating the moment of inertia is done by taking a unit length into
the vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-77(a) and (c)
File: BC80-98
Question (1): In complying with the requirements of UG-77(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, does the
marking of material with only the heat and slab number fulfill the identification requirements of "A
Coded marking"?
Reply (1): The heat and slab number can be used as a coded marking to satisfy tile rules. The
Manufacturer's quality control system shall include the proper controls.
Question (2): In complying with the requirements of UG-77(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, does the
marking of material formed into shapes with only the heat and slab number fulfill the identification
requirements of "Modified Marking Requirements"?
Reply (2): No. The marking of heat and slab number on the material is riot sufficient identification
when formed shapes are furnished by anyone other than the manufacturer of the completed pressure
vessel. The full marking as required by the applicable Material Specification is required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-23(c)
File: BC78-91
Question: May corrosion resistant weld metal overlay be used in determining the required thickness
of a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel?
Reply: Yes. For a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel, corrosion resistant weld metal overlay may be
used in determining the required thickness under the provisions of U-2(g). Attention is called to UCL-
23(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 for guidance in calculating equivalent weld metal overlay thicknesses.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1. Use of ASTM A 276 Type 304 in Place of SA-479 Type 304
File: BC80-92
Question: Is it permissible to use ASTM A 276 Type 304 material as a substitute for SA-479 Type
304 using stress values Per Section VIII, Division 1 for temperature in excess of 1000 F?
Reply: No. The Committee has reviewed the inclusion of ASTM A 276 Type 304 material into
the Code and the consensus is that this Specification is not suitable for Code construction.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-4 and AM-100
File: BC80-9
Question: May carbon, chrome, nickel alloy, or stainless materials which have been alloyed with
aluminum by calorizing be used for pressure retaining parts for vessels built to Section VIII, Division 1 or
2?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of Section VIII Divisions 1 and 2 are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-119(c) Use of Adhesive Nameplates
File: BC79-751
Question: Under the requirements of UG-119, Section VIII, Division 1, may a nameplate be made
of 0.003 in. thick aluminum metal foil and be attached to the vessel with an adhesive provided that:
(a) the nameplate satisfies the requirements of UG-119 for stamping of the Code Symbol and
vessel serial number with all other data embossed or impressed; and
(b) the nameplate and its adhesive have been tested and satisfy the Material Adhesion Test,
Section 2 wq of ANSI Z21.10.3-1975 at temperatures exceeding the maximum temperature at the point of
attachment?
Reply: Some comments are as follows
(a) The present rules do not establish a minimum thickness for nameplates
(b) Concerning the use of adhesive as a means of permanent attachment as required by UG-
119(c) this question was answered previously and is outlined below.
Question: Is it permissible to attach a vessel nameplate by the use of a high temperature adhesive?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 specifies in UG-119(c) that the required nameplate shall be
permanently attached by suitable means to the vessel in a conspicuous place. The adhesive material
described in the Question is not prohibited as a means to satisfy this requirement. It is the responsibility
of the vessel Manufacturer to determine that this adhesive would be able to withstand the conditions that
the vessel might see in service. If the nameplate does not directly adhere to the shell of the vessel, this
may not be a problem.
Thus the specific rules do not prohibit the use of an aluminum foil nameplate to the thickness,
marked and attached as described in the Question. As indicated by U-2(g), where complete rules are not
given, the details of construction are subject to acceptance by the Inspector.
The vessel manufacturer remains responsible for the suitability of the nameplate, particularly
including the permanence of the attachment and the markings.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-51(a)(3) Qualification of Radiographic Personnel
File: BC80-27
Question (1): Under the requirements of UW-51(a)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1, are all radiographs
for RT-1 and/or RT-2 radiographed vessels required to be interpreted by an interpreter that has been
qualified in accordance with SNT-TC-1A (1975 Edition)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May experience in welding, including locating, removing, and/or repairing defects by
radiography, be substituted for NDT Level I or II experience for the qualification of Radiograph
Interpreters provided the acceptance of this experience is included in the employers written practice?
Reply (2): No. Experience in welding including locating, removing, and/or repairing defects by
radiograph can certainly be a part of the manufacturer's written program for qualification of a
radiographic interpreter; however, the other requirements of the SNT-TC-1A document must be satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-8 Use of SA-358 Class 1 or 2 Fusion Welded Pipe
File: BC80-162
Question: May fusion welded austenitic chromium-nickel alloy steel pipe, meeting all of the
requirements of SA-358, Class 1 or 2, be used for shell or nozzle material in the fabrication of Section
VIII, Division 1 pressure vessels?
Reply: SA-358 is not an acceptable material under Section VIII, Division 1 requirements. If
fusion welded pipe is requested for usage under Section VIII, Division 1, then by the rules of UG-8, the
pipe shall be fabricated as a pressure part. Material procurement shall be to an acceptable Material
Specification in Section VIII, Division 1, or in compliance with the provisions of UG-10.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Use of Hexagon Socket-Head Cap Screws
File: BC80-123
Question: Is it permissible to use alloy steel socket head cap screws meeting ASTM A 574 on
vessels built in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The existing bolting Specifications approved by the Code were revised recently so that
head types other than hex could be furnished; therefore, it would be permissible under Section VIII,
Division 1 to order socket head cap screws to one of the Code approved Specifications.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-25 Corrosion Allowance
File: BC79-789
Question: Does the application of paint, including baked epoxy coatings, to the inside of pressure
vessels eliminate the requirements for corrosion allowance, as required by UG-25?
Reply: Other than for the specific corrosion requirements of UCS-25, the user (or designer) must
specify the manner and degree of corrosion protection. Nonmetallic coatings can be used for this
purpose, but if used, the Manufacturer's Data Report must show zero corrosion allowance.
Date Issued: April 16. 1980
File: BC80-13
Question: If a nozzle of the type shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketches (n) or (o) of Section VIII
Division 1, with its reinforcement, was required to be postweld treat treated, would the thickness criteria
in UCS-56(d)(4) be based solely on the nominal thickness of the shell or must the pad thickness also be
taken into account?
Reply: Under the requirements for postweld heat treatment in UCS-56(d)(4), the thickness
criteria is based on the nominal thickness of the shell without the reinforcement pad.
Interpretation: VIII-80-26-
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UW-12 and UW-15(b)
File: BC79-503
Question: Is there a conflict between the nozzle weld requirements in UW-15(b) versus those in
Table UW-12 for a Category D or other category joints?
Replay: No. The weld strength is given in UW-15(b) are to be used only for calculating load
carrying paths as required in UG-41. The weld joint efficiencies given in Table UW-12 are those to be
used in vessel wall thickness calculations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Maximum Allowable External Working Pressure for Seamless
Copper Alloy Tubes
File: BC79-763
Question: Is it permissible to establish the maximum allowable external working pressure of

seamless copper tubes complying with SB-111 Alloy 19200 by the formula in Code Case 1847?
Reply: No. Code Case 1847 is for special tubes with integral fins. Maximum allowable external
working pressure for all other tubes shall be established using the rules of UG-28.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AD-204.2
File: BC80-26
Question: Do the requirements of AD-204.2 apply only when there is no integral head skirt and the
cylindrical shell is welded directly at the head-to-shell tangent line?
Reply: No. AD-204.2 rules are unrelated to the location of a weld, if any, which may be placed
in the construction. These rules state that for a torispherical head, there shall be a cylindrical part attached
to the head which is at least as thick as the head thickness and shall be at least Rt long. Also, it tells that
a transition to a thicker shell may be in this zone while a transition to a thinner shell shall not be. AD-
204.5 gives one of the rules for minimum thickness of a skirt if it is provided, but other requirements of
AD-104.2 may prevail.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-18(d)
File: BC80-190
Question: In UW-18(d), what does the 55% joint efficiency factor represent when calculating the
allowable load on a fillet weld?
Reply: The 55% joint efficiency factor includes the conversion of the leg length of the fillet weld
to the throat length (0.707), and the conversion of the tensile strength to the shear strength (0.8);
therefore, no additional reduction need be taken in calculating the allowable load by computing the weld
area.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-36(b)(2)
File: BC80-59
Question: Is the word recommended as used in UG-36(b)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1

interpretable to be a mandatory or optional requirement?
Reply: The word recommended as used in UG-36(b)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1, indicates an
optional requirement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AD-150 and AD-151.1
File: BC80-141
Question: Is it permissible to use either of the stress intensity limits established by AD-150 and AD-
151.1 of Section VIII, Division 2, or must they both be observed?
Reply: The limits in both AD-150 and AD-151.1 of Section VIII, Division 2 must be met.
File: BC79-261
Question (1): Does the answer to Interpretation VIII-78-35, as shown below, actually apply to flanges
attached to nozzles as well as shells?
File: BC78-37
Question: Is it the intent of sketch (3) of Fig. UA-48 that it is permissible to attach a hubless flange
outside diameter of a shell of a vessel with a fillet weld shown by the dotted lines in that sketch?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is there not a conflict between attachment welds for hubless flanges of the loose and
optional types?
Reply (2): The Committee has recognized the discrepancies between welds shown for hubless
flanges of the loose and optional types as caused by the dotted lines. The dotted lines have been deleted,
and this change will appear in a forthcoming Addenda.
File: BC79-636 (BC78-268)
Question (1): Under the requirements of UA-903(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, is a crack to be
considered a linear discontinuity?
Reply (1): No. The acceptance standards of UA-903(a) apply to linear discontinuities other than
cracks, lack of fusion, or incomplete penetration which are covered in UA-903(b).
Question (2): Do the requirements of UA-903(b) require rejection of indications identified as cracks,
lack of fusion, or incomplete penetration, even though the indication produces an amplitude less than 20%
of the reference level?
Reply (2): Yes. If the UT examiner assesses an ultrasonic indication to be a crack, lack of fusion, or
incomplete penetration, UA-903(b) mandates rejection regardless of the UT signal amplitude. The
rejected area of the weldment must be corrected by repair welding.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(b)(1) and UG-90(b)(2)
File: BC80-129
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 require drawings and design calculations, referenced in
U2(b)(1) and UG-90(b)(2), to be prepared and/or reviewed by a registered professional engineer, for
vessels to be stamped in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-93(d)(4)(e)
File: BC80-213
Question: If a tubesheet is welded to a shell (less than 80% supported) in accordance with Fig. UW-
13.2, sketches (h), .(i), or (l) of Section VIII, Division 1, and the bolt hole is tapped into the tubesheet or
blind tapped into the tubesheet, which is the equivalent in bolt engagement, do the provisions of UG-
93(d)(4)(e) apply, i.e., no examination of the cut edge required?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-35(c)(3)
File: BC80-205
Question: Can the use of liquid penetrant alone be considered a satisfactory method of spot
examination under the provisions of UCL-35(c)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, Joint Efficiency of a Corner Joint, Fig. UW-13.2
File: BC79-351
Question: Shall the weld joint efficiencies of Table UW-12 and UW-12(a) and (b) for butt joints be
applied to corner joints as shown in Fig. UW-13.2?
Reply: No. Only the C and ZC factors are required to determine the required thickness of the flat
plate in UG-34.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Design Rules, UG-22 and U-2(g)
File: BC79-122
Question: Is it permissible to combine the design rules of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply: No. The design of nozzles and other vessel parts must satisfy the design rules of Section
VIII, Division 1 for design loadings specified in UG-22. When no design methods are given in Division
1, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be met. The methods used to satisfy the requirements of U-2(g) are the
responsibility of the U-Certificate Holder.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Part AD and Appendix 4
File: BC79-122
Question (1): Are the sample calculations as presented adequate to support the claim that "Vessels
fabricated to the design conditions quoted in the calculations would satisfy the ASME Codes without
recourse to additional design appraisal"?
Reply (1): The form of the question is not appropriate for code response. The following question
and reply may answer your immediate need.
Question (2): Are the stress indices given in 4-612 applicable if the D/t exceeds 100?
Reply (2): No. All requirements of the limitations in 4-613 must be met for the stress indices to be
applicable. When the limitations are not met, the Manufacturer must conduct such analysis (theoretical
and/or experimental) as needed to assure the User that stresses at nozzles or other locations have been
properly evaluated in accordance with the criteria contained in Appendices 4 and 5 that analysis must be
included in the Manufacturer's Design Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, Part AD and Appendix 4
File: BC79-122
Question (1): In accordance with the provisions of AD-160.2 and AD-160.3, if the exemptions are not
met, a detailed fatigue analysis shall be made. Considering the integral parts vessel, to what extent must
this be carried out? For example, is a discontinuity analysis required; and if so, how should this be
applied to the torispherical formed heads which are not covered by Article 4-7?
Reply (1): Appropriate stress analysis must be made of all Portions of the vessel to determine peak
stress intensities (see 4-135). For relatively simple and commonly used configurations, stress analysis
guidance is given in Appendix 4. However, absence of guidance in Appendix 4 does not mean that
analysis is not required. The type of analysis performed by the Manufacturer must be such as to assure
the User that the intent of the Code has been met, and these are to be described in the Manufacturer's
Design Report (see A-302.2 and A-302.3),
Question (2): In Article 4-6, the Stress Index Method for determining pressure stresses in single,
isolated openings imposes limitations on the use of the indices tabulated in 4-612. One of the
dimensional ratios specified under 4-613(c) seems incorrect. The ratio to which we refer was introduced
in the Winter 1977 Addenda and states that d/ Dt shall not exceed 0.80. Is this correct?
Reply (2): The limit is correct. The change introduced in the Winter 1977 Addenda was motivated
by research work done over the past several years which indicates that for certain types of nozzles, the
stress indices becomes unconservative for d/(Dt > 0.8.
Question (3): Also in Article 4-6, with our design, the limitation given in Question (2) and Reply (2)
restricts the use of the 4-612 indices to nozzles approximately 8 in. maximum diameter or requires the
head thickness to increase from 1 in. to 5.24 in. Is there an alternative?
Reply (3): The alternative rules in AD-560 were developed for a restricted range of parameters.
You have the option of using the rules in AD-510 through AD-550. These rules do not impose a
d/(Dt(0.8 restriction.
Question (4): Finally, in Article 4-6, if the dimensional ratios are outside of the limitations of 4-613(c),
is it acceptable to use theoretical Stress Concentration Factors obtained from authoritative sources such as
Leckie & Penny as used in the U.K. Vessel Code BS-5500?
Reply (4): Yes, provided they meet the intent of the Code (see 4-135), are acceptable to the User,
and are described in the Manufacturer's Design Report.
Question (5): In Article D-5. the Stress Indices tabulated under 4-612(a) refer to Nozzles in Spherical
Shells and Formed Heads. Similar indices are given in Table AD-560.7-1 but under (a) the heading refers
to Nozzles in Spherical Shells and Spherical Heads. Can the indices in the latter Table be applied to
openings in the spherical parts of torispherical formed heads?
Reply (5): If you can determine that the nozzle is of a size and location in the spherical part of the
torispherical head so that stresses are not influenced by the toroidal portion of the head or by other
nozzles in the head, then the stress indices could be used. The Manufacturer’s Design Report shall
describe that determination.
Question (6): In 4-610, when applying a stress index to a nozzle opening in a torispherical formed
head, is it correct to use a membrane stress derived from the formulas given in Article 4-4? If so, can we
assume that the empirical rules produce a membrane stress which is a maximum for any section of the
head including the transition from the spherical to the knuckle radius?
Reply (6): The indices are intended to be applicable to spherical heads but they may be used for
torispherical heads when justified as noted in Question (5) and Reply (5), above. Obviously, the
assumption is not correct.
Question (7) Article D-5 recognizes the use of nozzles with reinforcing pads as shown in Fig. AD-
612.1, sketches (a), (b),and (c). However, for our vessel manway, the limitation of AD-560.1 requires
that radius r2, is not less than 2 in. The size of the corner weld which can be made to this dimension is, in
our opinion, likely to result in cracking. This suggests that where high cycling duty is involved requiring
a fatigue analysis, the Code prefers the use of integral type nozzle reinforcement. The same general
remarks apply to the application of Article 4-6. Is this observation corrects
Reply (7) AD-560.1 imposes limitations on the Alternative Design Rules. Those rules (AD-560)
are not to be used for pad reinforced nozzles see AD-560.1(b)] . You have the option of using AD-501
through AD-551 and can use any radius r, that you wish. However, if your radius r 2 does not meet 4-
613(e), the tabulated stress indices in 4-612 are not applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (c)
File: BC80-199
Question: May an intermediate head in a compartmented vessel constructed in accordance with Part
UHT of Section VIII, Division 1 be installed in accordance with Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (c)?
Reply: No. If the vessel is to be designed according to Part UHT, their the rules of UHT-17 must
be followed. Any Category B joint must be Type 1 of Table UW-12 except for special materials listed in
UHT-17(b) which permits a Category B joint to be either Type 1 or Type 2 of Table UW-12. In either
situation, butt welds are required and the combination of fillet weld and plug weld is not permitted for
UHT vessels.
File: BC80-214
Question; May a corner joint attaching a shell to tubesheet be acceptable, and not require full
radiography under the provisions of UW-2(c) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC80-175
Question Are there any mandatory requirements as to the dimensions of a stiffening ring under
UG-29 of Section VIII, Division 1 in regard to the proportions between width and height?
Reply: No. Section VIII, Division 1 does not have rules which cover the stability of a cross
section in compression or compressive bending, such as that generated on a stiffening ring. Therefore,
the rules of U-2.(g) shall be followed.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UG-99(f)
File: BC80-196
Question (1). Is the wording of UG-99(f), Section VIII, Division 1 clear in stating the requirement for
calculating the hydrostatic test pressure? It seems the value would work out negative if the internal
design pressure exceeded 14.7 psia.
Reply: The wording of UG-99(f) is correct in that the word difference is used which gives no
connotation of a sign, either plus or minus.
Question (2) How are hydrostatic test rules to be applied for a vessel which is designed for internal and
external pressure?
Reply (2): A vessel which is designed for internal pressure and for external pressure must be
examined as a combination unit according to UG-99(c) unless some design feature shows that the
combination of internal and external pressure cannot occur independently. If each can occur
independently from the other, the vessel must be hydrostatically tested for each independent design
condition.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Form U-1A Data for Nozzles and Inspection Openings
File: BC80-45
Question: For Data Report Form U-1A, Item 11, Nozzles and Inspection Openings, Section VIII,
Division 1, what data should be entered under the following columns?
(a) Type;
(b) Matl.; and
(c) Nom. Thk.
Reply: There are no specific requirements concerning the data entered in these columns. Data
entries acceptable to the Inspector satisfy the requirements. The most common practices, which satisfy
the intent of the Form, are described as follows:
(a) Type. With abbreviations or coded identification define:
(1) any generic name, such as coupling, studding outlet. long weld neck flange, etc.;
(2) the type of attachment from the opening to connecting piping, or to a closure, such as
screwed, welded, or flanged;
(3) for ANSI B16.5 flanges the class should be defined. (The facing and type of attachment to the
opening need not be shown.). Thus, abbreviations for some typical types would be as follows:
Screwed Coupling Scd. Cpl.
Socket Welded Coupling S.W. Cpl.
Flanged Fabricated Nozzle 150# Flgd.
Weld End Fabricated Nozzle W.E.
Screwed Fabricated Nozzle Scd.
Long Weld Neck Flange 300# LWN Flg.
(b) Material. If the opening is fabricated from more than one material, as for a pipe nozzle with a
welded flange, show the material for the nozzle neck. In such cases, it is not necessary to define the
flange material.
(c) Nom. Thk. The nominal thickness applies to the part defined for material under (b) above.
Where the parts are in accordance with an ANSI Standard, such as B16.11, the appropriate class
designation may be substituted for the thickness.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-34 Flat Tubesheet
File: BC80-176
Question (1): In designing for ligament efficiency in a circular flat tubesheet, may the requirements of
UG-53 of Section VIII, Division 1 be used in conjunction with those of UG-34?
Reply (1): No. The rules of UG-53 apply only to cylindrical shells and they were developed on that
basis alone. It would be inappropriate to use UG-53 rules with UG-34 rules. The design of flat
tubesheets shall follow UG-34, UG-37, and U-2(g).
Question (2): Can any technical guidance be given in designing the insert retaining ring as illustrated in
Fig. UG-34, sketch (n)?
Reply (2): Although there is guidance and warnings given for many configurations, design rules are
not always given; therefore, in those instances the rules of U-2(g) shall apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Use of Quenched and Tempered Material
File: BC80-278
Question: If quenched and tempered plates conforming to SA-517 are used in Code construction per
Section III-Divisions 1 and 2, is it necessary to carry out quenching and tempering after fabrication and
welding?
Reply: No. However, see requirements in Table UHT-56 in Division 1 and Table AF-630.1 in
Division 2 for postweld heat treatment requirements, if applicable.
File: BC80-217
Question: Would the requirements of UCS-85(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 be met if test plates in
the normalized condition are used to represent P No.-1 Gr. 1 Nos. 1 and 2 material both in the normalized
and as-rolled condition?
Reply: No. A normalized test plate may not be used to represent material which has been
furnished in the as-rolled condition regardless of later forming operations.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following corrected reply sent to
the inquirer.
Correction Issued: July 23, 1980
Reply: No. The heat treatment condition of the test plate must be the same as that in which the
Material Specification and additional Code requirements are certified. For plate furnished and certified in
the as-rolled condition, the test plate should be in the as-rolled (plus any PWHT) condition. For plate
furnished in either the as-rolled or normalized condition, but certified on the basis of material or test
coupons in the normalized condition, the test plate should be in the normalized condition (plus any
PWHT).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2 Tapered Shell at Corner Joint
File: BC78-627
Question: The cylindrical portion of a vessel has an actual thickness ts exclusive of corrosion
allowance which is greater than that required for its design loading (see UG-22). May the shell be tapered
down via a 3:1 taper to its minimum required thickness plus corrosion allowance at the point of
attachment to a tubesheet using the permissible weld details shown in Fig. UW-13.2?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not prohibit this approach of reducing excess shell
thickness at tubesheet welded attachment points. However, the designer is cautioned, when using such a
detail, that a point of undesirable stress concentration may result at the point of minimum thickness, for
cyclic and/or other design loading outlined in UG-22.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Attachment of Studs or Thermocouples to a Vessel
File: BC79-332
Question: Is it permissible in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 construction to make use of the
capacitor discharge method to make a temporary attachment of studs or thermocouples to a vessel?
Reply: Yes. The capacitor discharge method is a resistance welding technique which is accepted
under the provisions of Section VIII.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Strength of Weld Metal vs Base Metal
File: BC80-293
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, what criteria should be used to determine the
maximum allowable stress for a welded joint when the weld metal has a specified lower strength than the
base metal?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 at the present time has no criteria for determining the stress of a
welded joint by using the strength of the weld metal. The maximum allowable stress shall be determined
using the base metal values.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66(c)(2)
File: BC80-44
All of the below listed questions apply to vessels constructed under the provisions of Section
VIII, Division 1, UCS-66(c)(2) or UHA-51, which waive the requirement for impact test of materials for
design metal temperatures below -20 F provided that the minimum thickness is determined by
multiplying the coincidental pressure by 2 1/2. The lower than -425 F or -325 F temperature limits of
UHA-51(a) do not apply.
Question (1): Do the weld joint restrictions of UW-2(b) apply?
Reply(1): No, except where UHA-51(c) applies. See UCS-67(b) and UHA-51(b).
Question (2): Within the limitations of Table UW-12, may Type Nos. 2 through 6 joints be used?
Reply(2): Yes except where UHA-51(c) applies.

Question (3): Are weld metal impact tests required?
Reply (3): No, except where UHA-51(c) applies. See UG-84(h)(2), UG-84(i)(2), UCS-66(c)(2), and
UHA-51(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UW-35(a)(2) and AF-221.1(b)
File: BC80-292
Question: Do UW-35(a)(2) and AF-221.1(b) of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 permit a reduction
in thickness adjacent to the weld (commonly referred to as undercutting), and that the weld may be left as
welded unless the limitations outlined in the paragraphs are exceeded?
Reply: Yes.
ATTENTION
Upon further review of our reply of June 10, 1990, the following clarification is being made to
the question.
Question: Do UW-35(a)(2) and AF-211.1(b) of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 permit a reduction
in thickness adjacent to the weld (commonly referred to as undercutting) and permit the weld to be left as
welded?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-704 and UA-709 of Appendix 13
File: BC80-2
Question (1): In the nomenclature of UA-704, footnote 2 of Section VIII, Division 1, what is the intent
in introducing the length p into the moment equation for unreinforced vessels?
Reply (1): For reinforced vessels the length is not divided into unit strips, as is for unreinforced
vessels, but into strips of p dimension. The equations for the bending stress of the reinforced sections
apply I11 or Z11 (I21, I22, or Z21) as shown in UA-707(e). For vessels which are partially reinforced [Fig.
UA-701(a), sketch (5)], the moment of inertia
I=pt3 /12
is used in those sections which are not reinforced as shown in UA-707(f) for (Sb)D, (Sb)E, etc. This is
illustrated in Example UA-715(e).
Question (2): Is there a discrepancy in the dimensions of UA-704 for Eqs. (4), (5), (6), and (7) of UA
709?
Reply (2): Footnote 2 of UA-704 applies to all unreinforced vessels [this includes Fig. UA-701(b),
sketch (1)-the vessel section for UA-709] ; namely, that I is for a unit strip and equal to
I = t 3/12 in .3
Consequently, the units in Eqs, (4), (5), (6), and (7) of UA-709 are consistent and yield psi. Note that in a
bending stress equation
Sb = Mc/I
c is in the numerator and I in the denominator.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52(b)(2)
File: BC80-284
Question: What is required by UW-52(b)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 regarding the number of
spot radiographic examinations required, especially when multiple welders, or welding operators are
involved?
Reply: The provisions of UW-52(b)(2) require that one spot radiograph be made for each 50
linear ft of weld and that every welder be represented by a spot radiograph. However, note that Section
VIII, Division 1 permits two or more welders to be represented by one spot radiograph, e.g., a multiple
layered weld or a double butt weld.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, UG-21, and UG-99 Design, Relief Devices, Hydrostatic
Testing, and Data Reports for Combination Units
File: BC79-513
Question (1): The tube side of a heat exchanger has a significantly higher operating and design pressure
than the normal operating pressure of the shell side. Must the possibility of a tube failure be considered in
establishing the maximum allowable working pressure at the shell side?
Reply (1): As covered in UG-133(d),the possibility of a tube failure must be considered in

determining the capacity of relief devices to prevent overpressure. Otherwise the maximum allowable
working pressure of one chamber need not influence the determination of the maximum allowable
working pressure for internal pressure of another chamber of a combination unit. See UG-19.
Question (2): For a fixed tubesheet exchanger, may both the tube side and the shell side be
hydrostatically tested by applying pressure only to the shell side provided the test pressure exceeds the
minimum test pressure requirements of UG-99 for either chamber?
Reply (2): No. See UG-99(e).
Question (3): On Data Report Form U-1, which Item is to be completed for the tube side design
conditions of a heat exchanger?
Reply (3): Item 17.

Question (4): Data Report Form U-3 for vessels to be stamped with the UM Symbol does not contain
entries for all items that would be applicable for a heat exchanger. How should the additional data be
presented.
Reply (4): The additional data should be shown on the supplementary sheet, Form U-4, using Form
U-1 as a guide to additional data required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Documentation Requirements for Compliance With ASNT
SNT-TC-1A
File: BC80-305
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 require that actual examinations for subcontracted
nondestructive examination personnel be at the Certificate Holder's location?
Reply (1): There are no specific requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 which cover any
procedures which a Certificate Holder may need to perform to comply with the provisions of SNT-TC-
1A. However, it is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that actual examinations for subcontracted NDE
personnel need not be performed at the Certificate Holder's location provided that there is sufficient
traceability of the documented examination in the quality control system of the Certificate Holder, and it
meets with the acceptance of the Authorized Inspector.
Question (2): If it is not a requirement that the documents be at the Certificate Holder's location, does
Section VIII, Division 1 consider it satisfactory for the Certificate Holder and Authorized Inspector to
review the actual examinations at the subcontractor's location for compliance with SNT-TC-1A?
Reply (2). This may be one method in accomplishing the review.
Question (3): What documents, as a minimum, must be physically located at the Certificate Holder's
location for compliance with SNT-TC-1A?
Reply (3). None, if there is sufficient traceability in the quality control system of the Certificate
Holder.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, A-100(b)(1) and A-301.1
File: BC80-188
Question: May a vessel Manufacturer design and construct for sales in quantity, vessels to be
ASME Code Symbol Stamped in accordance with Section VIII, Division 2 rules using a set of operating
and design parameters established by the vessel Manufacturer?
Reply: The rules of Section VIII, Division 2 do not prohibit the procedure described in the
Question provided that all applicable requirements, including the user's responsibilities as defined in A-
301, are satisfied for each vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix XIII, * UA-703,* UA-704, and * UA-708
File: BC80-180
Question (1): Are UA-703(e), UG-34, and UW-3(a)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 to be interpreted to
mean that weld efficiency shall be used in the calculation of end plate only when there is a joint within the
rectangular plate so that it may be considered 1 when (as usual) corner welds are joining the edges of the
ends to the four side plates?
Reply (1): Yes. The rules of Appendix XIII specify that weld efficiencies in accordance with Table
UW-12 shall apply only to butt joints located within the side or end plates but not to corner weld joints
which are not butt welded. These latter joints shall be controlled by the applicable rules for sizing such
joints.
Question (2): Is UA-704 to be interpreted to mean that:

(a) weld efficiency is applicable when the point of calculation is located in the same part (side
plate) where the joint is located?
(b) ligament efficiencies em or eb (UA-705*) are applicable only when the point of calculation is
located within a row of holes of the compartment?
(c) weld efficiency does not apply to corner joints since stresses in these joints are controlled by
rules such as UW-13(b)(2)?
Reply (2):
(a) Yes. The weld joint efficiency shall be applied to the calculation when a butt joint is located
anywhere within the part even though the joint is not located at the point of calculation.
(b) No. Ligament efficiency and weld joint efficiency are both designated E (UA-704) and used
the same way in the equations. Therefore, the ligament efficiency shall be applied to the calculations
when the row of holes is located anywhere within the part even though it is not located at the point of
calculation. Of course, the value of E for the corner calculation (subscript Q) is taken as 1.00 as
Illustrated in the example UA-715(a).*
(c) Yes. Footnote 1 of UA-704 is explicit.
* With the publication of the 1980 Edition, Appendix XIII, UA-703, UA-704, UA-705, UA-708, and UA-
715 were redesignated as Appendix 13, 13-4, 13-5, 13-6, 13-9, and 13-16, respectively.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Case 1854
File: BC80-248
Question: For pressure vessels of general construction that may become out-of-round during
construction and the condition cannot reasonably be corrected, may the vessel be stamped for a reduced
internal pressure determined by the methods permitted by Code Case 1854, provided there is excess
thickness over that required by UG-27 for internal pressure?
Reply: No, Code Case 1854 permits application of its requirements for a specific type of vessel
(enameled lined) and could not be used for vessels of general construction
File: BC80-356
Question: Is it the intent of the words “edge of a weld.” in UW-14(d) of Section VIII Division 1 to
mean the edge as shown in a weld detail, or from the toe of the weld when overlap is present?
Reply: The “edge of a weld.” in UW-14(d) represents the edge of the weld in a weld detail.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix Y and Code Case 1828
File BC80-365
Question: When analyzing flanges per Appendix Y of Section VIII, Division 1 and Code Case 1828
can the assembly stress (prestress Si) and the operating bolt stress Sb be increased above the maximum
allowable bolt stress values given in the various Tables of Subsection C?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-42(b)(1) and (b)(2)
File: BC80-307
Question (1): When restoring base material thickness for strength considerations must the weld as
magnetic particle or dye penetrant tested per UW-42(b)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When restoring base material thickness, for strength considerations must the weld as per
UW-42 of Section VIII, Division 1 be radiographed when full radiography or spot radiography is a
requirement for the vessel?
Reply (2): Yes, when such surface weld metal buildup is used in welded joints which require full or
spot radiographic examination.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UNF-95
File: BC80-372
Question: Is it the intent of UNF-95 of Section VIII-Division 1 that one production test plate be
made of one of the vessel thicknesses (in a multiple thickness vessel) for each welder or welding operator
for each 100 ft of Category A or B joints when constructed of welded unalloyed titanium or zirconium?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UA-46(d)* and Fig. UA-48* Sketches (7), (8), (8a), (8b), and (9)
File: BC80-215
Question (1): Are the requirements of UA-46(d)(2)(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable when
fabricating plate ring flanges per Fig. UA-48 sketches (7), (8), (8a), (8b), and (9)?
Reply (1): Yes, if a fabricated, integrally-formed hubbed flange is used.
Question (2): Is it permissible to simply cut a ring from plate and use it as a flange in all of the sketches
referenced in Question (1)?
Reply (2): Only if an integrally-formed hub is not used, that is, the hub cross section is rectangular
as shown in those sketches without a hub.
* With the publication of the 1980 Edition, UA-46 and UA-48 were redesignated as 2-2 and 2-4,
respectively.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11, UW-27, and UA-46*
File BC80-364
Question (1): Is it permissible under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to fabricate flanges by hot
ring rolling, and electroslag welding the joints?
Reply (1): Yes. See UA-46(d) and UW-5(c) of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): If permissible, is it then mandatory to fully radiograph the welded joint, or perform an
ultrasonic examination including heat treatment, or to perform both?
Reply(2): In electroslag welding butt joints in ferritic and austenitic materials, the provisions of
UW-11(a)(6) and UW-11(d) require full radiography and ultrasonic examination (see UW-27).
* With the publication of the 1980 Edition, UA-46 was redesignated as 2-2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UB-8(a)
File: BC80-392
Question: Is it permissible to use SA-53 Type F Pipe for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: No. SA-53 Type F is presently not listed in the Tables of Subsection C with appropriate
stress values (see UG-8).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-26(d) and Code Case 1913
File: BC80-390
Question: Is it permissible to use welders, not in the employ of a Code Symbol Stamp holder and at
a location not shown on the Manufacturer's Certificate of Authorization, for Section VIII, Division 1
fabrication?
Reply: Yes, provided that work at a location not shown on the Certificate of Authorization is
permitted by the accepted Quality Control System and all requirements of UW-26(d) are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UA-280,* Nozzle Reinforcement
File: BC80-298
Question (1): In calculation of reinforcement area from nozzles made from standard pipe in UA-280 of
Section VIII, Division 1, shall the nozzle wall thickness for reinforcement calculations be based on
nominal wall thickness?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When a nozzle is installed in a nonradial position, what is the distance of the reinforcing
limits on the inward projecting areas?
Reply (2): The limits of reinforcement are given in UG-40. Regardless of whether or not the nozzle
is radial or nonradial, excess metal within the limits may be included as reinforcement as long as it meets
all of the requirements for reinforcement, such as strength, etc.
* With the publication of the 1980 Edition, UA-280 was redesignated as L-7.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-16(c) and UG-32(a), Tolerance on Plate Thickness
File: BC79-322
Question: Assume that in accordance with footnote 12 of UG-32 Section VIII, Division 1, a plate
which is to be formed into a head is ordered with a forming allowance considered appropriate for the
application but without an additional allowance for mill under tolerances on the plate. After forming, the
head is found to have a minimum thickness less than required by UG-32. May the undertolerance
permitted by UG-16(c) be applied to the minimum thickness calculations, and if the actual minimum
thickness is within this limit, may the head be used at the design pressure corresponding to the calculated
minimum thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-37 through UG-41, Nozzle Reinforcement
File: BC80-43
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-37 through UG-41 of Section VIII,
Division 1 to take full credit for the area between a nozzle taper and a flange for a self-reinforcing nozzle
when it becomes necessary to increase the nozzle thickness above the standard value when construction
requires the nozzle flange be integral with the nozzle neck?
Reply Yes,
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, U G-37(c)(2)
File: BC80-402
Question: Is reinforcement required for an opening in the inner vessel of a jacketed vessel designed
for external pressure?
Reply: Yes. See UG-37(c)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-101(m)
File: BC80-403
Question: In using the burst test provisions of UG-101(m) of Section VIII Division 1, is it necessary
to rupture the part if a test pressure is attained (without failure) which will yield the desired maximum
allowable working pressure at test temperature by substituting the maximum test pressure applied for "B,
bursting test pressure" in the applicable equations of UG-101(m)(2)?
Reply: It is not necessary to take a part through rupture to comply with the rules of UG-101(m).
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UW-11(a)
File: BC79-628
Question: A vessel is required to comply with the requirements of UW-11(a) for full radiography.
Under what circumstances may partial radiography be used for Category B welds in the shell in order to
utilize a value of E = 1.0 and S = 100% of the tabulated value in the stress Tables in the circumferential
stress calculations for the shell?
Reply: UW-11(a)(5)(b) permits Category B welds in the shell, that are not required to be fully
radiographed by UW-11(a)(1), (2), (3), or (4) and that are examined by the acceptance standards of UW-
51, to be partially radiographed and comply with the requirements of UW-11(a). This would permit E =
1.0 and S = 100% for the calculations described in the Question.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UG-34 Sketch (g) and UHT-83(b)
File: BC80-384
Question: Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 require magnetic particle or liquid penetrant
examination of a corner joint in a double wall pressure vessel in which the construction consists of
welding the peripheral surface of a flat cover plate to the outer shell of the vessel in a manner similar to
that shown in Fig. UG-34 sketch (g), and the inner shell is welded to the flat cover in a manner similar to
that shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (e)?
Reply: No. The rules of Section VIII, Division 1 do not require such examination since in the
case in question the cut edges of the flat cover plate are eliminated by fusion with weld deposits.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-16(b) and (c), Sheet Tolerance
File: BC80-194
Question: Is it the intent of UG-16(b) to establish a minimum thickness of 1/16 in. without
allowance for undertolerance?
Reply: No. The undertolerances of UG-16(c) may be applied to the minimum thickness of UG-
16(b). We caution you to observe the warning in the last sentence of UG-16(c) which points out that
some material specifications permit greater undertolerances than permitted in UG-16(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-23, Use of SA-515 and SA-516
File: BC79-4
Question (1): May material supplied to SA-515 and SA-516 for pressure vessel construction be used
for continuous operation up to 800 F as shown in Table UCS-23 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the materials referenced in Question (1), may they both be used for continuous
operation over 800 F, up to the temperatures stated in Table UCS-23 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes. However the Manufacturer is cautioned by Note (19) of Table UCS-23 of possible
graphitization above 800 F.
File: BC80-430
Question: Are the requirements of either UG-45(a)(1) or (a)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1
applicable to a heater neck, which contains heater coils, that is inserted through a head of a vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC80-438
Question: May ultrasonic examination, or magnetic particle examination, or both be used in lieu of
full radiographic examination, as called for in UW-11 of Section VIII, Division 1 when fabricating a
vessel under Code rules?
Reply: No, except as given in UW 11(a)(7).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52, Personnel Qualification for Spot Examination of
Welded Joints by Radiography
File: BC78-669
Question: Are the personnel performing spot examination of welded joints by radiography under
UW-52 Section VIII, Division 1 required to be qualified in accordance with SNT-TC-1A-1975?
Reply: Yes. Personnel performing spot radiography under UW-52 are required to be qualified in
accordance with SNT-TC-1A-1975.
File: BC80-421
Question Does UG-10 include shapes among the product forms that can be identified provided the
shape Material Specification, such as SA-36, is listed in one of the allowable stress Tables and that shape
is indicated as an allowable product form and stress values are listed for the temperature at which the
material will be used.
Reply: Yes, it is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that shapes as described in the Question
may be included with bar stock under the provisions of UG-10.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, Table AD-155.1, Note (5)
File: BC80-422
Question: A Section VIII, Division 2 vessel made of ferrous material other than austenitic is to be in
lethal service and, therefore, must be postweld heat treated. Is it permissible to pressure test this vessel at
the same temperature as the impact test temperature which is colder than that determined by Note (5) of
Table AD-155.1?
Reply: No.
File: BC80-323
Question: In designing vessels for cryogenic service, what is the criteria in Section VIII, Division 1
for establishing test temperature and its variance when performing impact tests?
Reply: The requirements of UG-84(b)(2) specify the provisions to follow when establishing a
test temperature for impact tests.
Interpretation: VIII-80-84 Void See 80-84R Vol. 14 Pg. 88 ]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-79(c)

File: BC80-434
Question: Is UCS-79(b), Section VIII, Division 1 violated if after fabrication: of portions of a cone,
a hammer is used to correct some deformation, or distortion, or both?
Reply: Yes. UCS-79(b) prohibits cold forming by blows; however, you may be able to meet the
requirements of UCS-79(c).
Revisions and Other Actions to Interpretations Published in Previous Volumes
Interpretation VIII-80-84, which was published on p. 75 of Interpretations Volume No. 8, is hereby

rescinded.
Interpretation: VIII-1-80-84R See Errata Below
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79(b) and Part UHA
File: BC82-403 & BC 80-434
Question (1): Per UCS-79(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, carbon and low alloy steel plates shall not be
formed cold by blows. Will removal of dents and distortion by hammering manually amount to forming
cold by blows so as to reject material?
Reply (1): No. UCS-79 only applies to forming.
Question (2): May shells and heads under Section VIII, Division 1 rules be formed out of high alloy
steel material by cold blows?
Reply (2): This is not specifically covered in the Code. UG-79(a) applies. The suggestions in
Appendix HA should also be considered.
Errata Volume 14 (1) Correct Interpretation to read. VIII-80-84R

Interpretation (2) Correct File to read., BC80-434*, BC82-403
File: BC80-455
Question: Does the exemption in UCS-66(c)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to a nozzle, and
can impact testing be waived if the nozzle minimum thickness is determined using 2 1/2 times the
coincident pressure?
Replay: Yes/
Interpretation: VIII-80-86-
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 9, Fig. 9-5 Sketch (c)
File: BC80-280
Question: Is it permissible when using a jacket closure as shown in Fig. 9-5 sketch (c) of Section
VIII, Division 1 where the closure thickness tc. = 1 in. and = 30 deg. to have the closure weld shaped
as an equilateral triangle having 1 in. sides?
Reply: No. The closure weld geometry is based on the jacket closure thickness and the angle ;
therefore, when the angle is at its maximum of 30 deg., only one closure weld configuration is
appropriate.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-100(a)(1) and (2)
File: BC80-419
Question (1): May a pneumatic test be used in lieu of the required hydrostatic test in Section VIII,
Division 1 when the exemptions from performing the hydrostatic test as given in UG-100(a)(1) and (2)
are not a consideration?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Must the Manufacturer's Data Report Forms U-1, U-1A, etc., be completed in accordance
with the latest Form published?
Reply (2): The mandatory requirements concerning the completion of Manufacturer's Data Report
Forms are the same as for any other Code revisions. As stated in the eighth paragraph of the Foreword of
Section VIII, Division 1: ".. Revisions become mandatory as minimum requirements six months after
such date of issuance, except for boilers or pressure vessels contracted for prior to the end of the six
month period." The latest form may be used upon publication.
Interpretation., VIII-80-88
Subject: Section VIII, Division, 1, UW-28 and UW-29
File: BC80-497
Question (1): Is it required by Section VIII, Division 1 when an autogenous seal weld is used in a tube-
to-tubesheet joint to have a welding procedure qualified to Section IX?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If filler metal of an A-Number .compatible with the P-Number of the base metals is
added, would this be considered a strength weld requiring Section IX qualifications
Reply (2) The addition of filler metal would require qualification to Section IX; however, whether
it would be considered a strength weld is something not covered by the provisions of Section VIII,
Division 1 and for that the requirements of U-2(g) shall be followed.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Hardfacing Safety Relief Valve Disks and Body Seating
File: BC90-506
Question: Was it a requirement of the 1965 and 1968 Editions with Addenda of Section VIII
Divisions 1 and 2, or is it a requirement of the present Editions to qualify hardfacing welding procedures
in accordance with Section IX used for hardfacing safety relief valve disks and body seating surfaces?
Reply: The 1965, 1968, as well as the present Editions of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 do not
specify any requirements for hardfacing of safety relief valve disks and body seating surfaces.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(b)
File: BC80-400
Question: What joint efficiency factor and allowable stress factor are required for a head-to-shell
joint in a vessel in which the head is a torispherical seamless head and the requirements of UW-12(b) of
Section VIII, Division 1 are imposed?
Reply: When UW-12(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 is followed and a seamless torispherical
head is used, the efficiency used to calculate the head is E = 1.0, but the stress value used in the
calculations is 85% of that value given in Subsection C. If a joint efficiency of E = 1.0 and a stress value
of 100% of the value given in Subsection C is desired, the Category B head-to-shell joint must have full
or partial radiography according to UW-11(a) including UW-11(a)(5)(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2 and Code Case 1749, Flange Design
File: BC80-428
Question (1): May fabricated hubbed flanges be formed from plate and what are the requirements?
Reply (1): Rules for fabricated hubbed flanges are given in 2-2(d) of the 1980 Edition of Section
VIII, Division 1. The hubbed flanges may be fabricated from plate when the requirements of 2-2(d)(2)
are met.
Question (2): May the rules of Code Case 1749 be used for flange design and fabrication?
Reply (2): No. The rules are presently applicable to hubs of tubesheets and flat heads fabricated
from rolled plate.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-23(c) and UCL-42
File: BC79-790
Question: In using the fabrication procedures of UCL-42 of Section VIII, Division 1, is it
permissible to use weld metal of 9Cu-Ni in the base metal of integrally clad plate when calculating the
minimum required thickness of a weld that has different strength than the base metal?
Reply: Yes, as long as the welding procedure specification as outlined in Section IX has been
met. The strength of the weld is not a consideration in Section VIII, Division 1 calculations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-46(e) and UG-46(i), Requirements for Tapered Threads for
Openings and Connections
File: BC80-285
Question (1) What does UG-43(e) require regarding the use of screwed fittings with straight threads in
accordance with ANSI B2.1-1968 for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply (1): UG-43(e) states that the thread shall be a standard tapered pipe thread, except that a
straight thread of equal strength may be used if other sealing means to prevent leakage are provided.
Question (2): What does UG-46(i) require regarding "other sealing means" when straight thread pipe
fittings are used for inspection openings?
Reply (2): "Other sealing means" would include the use of a seal weld or a suitable gasket.
Date Issued: September 29,1980
File: BC80-354
Question: Is it acceptable under the requirements of Table UCS-56, Note(2)(a) of Section VIII,
Division 1 when you have a P-No. 3 Group No. 1 material to use 16 mm as a metric equivalent to the 5/8
in. thickness provision?
Reply: The use of English units shall be the required customary units under the Code; however,
when it can be shown that a metric equivalent is within a small tolerance of the Code referenced
customary unit, then the equivalent may be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 and 2, Microstructure of SA-515 and SA-516 for Hot Formed
Dished Ends
Date Issued: September 29,1990
File: BC80-381
Question: Does the presence of Widmanstatten Structures in a hot-formed head for a Section VIII,
Division 1 or 2 vessel constitute a nonacceptable criteria as far as the specifications are concerned for SA-
515 and SA-516 materials?
Reply: SA-515 and SA-516 do not include any requirements for microstructure configurations.
Accordingly, the Widmanstatten Structures in a hot formed head are not part of the requirements for
acceptance.
File: BC80-537
Question: Would the minimum thickness requirement of UG-16(b)(5) of Section VIII, Division 1
be applicable to a double pipe or multitube heat exchanger with a nominal inside diameter of 6 in. or less?
Reply: The requirements of U-1(c)(9) of Section VIII, Division 1 exclude from the Scope of
Division 1 vessels having an inside diameter, width, height, or diagonal of 6 in. or less.
However, if the Manufacturer chooses to Code Stamp the vessels, the rules of UG-16(b)(2) and
(3) are applicable for heat exchangers.
Interpretation VIII-80-97
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Material Usage for Intermediate Head per Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch
(f)
File: BC80-474
Question (1): Is it permissible when fabricating an intermediate head per Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (f) of
Section VIII, Division 1 for cryogenic service, in which both chambers contain liquid nitrogen, to use SA-
240 Type 304 stainless material?
Reply (1): If impact tests are a requirement under UHA-51 and each chamber is considered to be an
independent pressure vessel, an intermediate head as Illustrated in Fig, UW-13.1 sketch (f) is not
acceptable under the Code since the requirements of UW-2 for Category B Joints to be a butt weld is not
satisfied. If impact tests are required, and the entire shell is designed to satisfy the most severe condition,
and the vessel is described as a single chamber vessel, an intermediate head of the type shown in Fig.
UW-13.1 sketch (f) can be used as an internal structure.
Question (2): Referring to Question (1), is it permissible to fabricate such a vessel with an intermediate
head when one chamber contains liquid oxygen and the other contains liquid nitrogen?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Should the U-1 Data Report Form Show the data for the intermediate head?
Reply (3): Yes.
ATTENTION
The foregoing Interpretation has been further considered and the following clarified versions of
Replies (1) and (2) sent to the inquirer.
Clarification Issued: October 31, 1980
Reply (1): If impact tests of materials or welds are a requirement under UHA-51 or any other
applicable Code rule, and each chamber is considered to be an independent pressure vessel, an
intermediate head as illustrated in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f) is not acceptable under the Code since the
requirements of UW-2 for Category B Joints to be a butt weld is not satisfied. If impact tests are required,
and the entire shell is designed to satisfy the most severe condition, and the vessel is described as a single
chamber vessel, an intermediate head of the type shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f) can be used as an
internal structure.
Reply (2): Yes. The designer and the user of a vessel incorporating an intermediate head as shown
in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f) of Section VIII, Division 1 needs to determine the effect of any leakage that
might exist between the two chambers.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AT-203(a)
File: BC80-547
Question: Under the requirements of AT-203(a), Section VIII, Division 2, may a test plate represent
a group of vessels of the same specification, grade of material, and material thickness, when the test plate
is made for each qualified welding procedure used on the group of vessels?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCI-78(a)
File: BC80-380
Question: In sand cast machine dryers, imperfections are generally repaired in accordance with
UCI-78(a), Section VIII, Division 1. May imperfections that exceed the limitations of UCI-78(a) be
allowed if the thickness below the imperfection exceeds the minimum required calculated thickness?
Reply: Imperfections may exceed the limitations of UCI-78(a) if the thickness below the
imperfection exceeds the minimum required calculated thickness, and the imperfection sides have
rounded edges to reduce stress concentrations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-15, UW-16, UW-18, UG-41 and Fig. UA-48*
Date Issued October 9, 1980
File: BC80-423
Question (1): Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1, that in addition to meeting the minimum
dimension requirements specified in UW-16, that calculations must be performed to demonstrate that
attachment welds meet the strength requirements of UW-15 and UG-41?
Reply(1): Yes. The minimum attachment weld requirements given in UW-16 and shown in Figs.
UW-16.1 and UW-16.2 are-as stated-"minimums." The requirements of UW-15 and UG-41 must also be
met.
Question(2): If the weld metal stress values specified in UW-15 apply to nozzles and reinforcement, in
what cases does the stress value specified in UW-18(d) apply?
Reply(2): UW-15 is strictly for the reinforcing load-carrying paths of nozzles where UW-18 is for
fillet welds which may not necessarily be around a nozzle. The values in UW-15(b) are 7/8 times the
values in UW-18(d) to account for the combined end and side loadings. That is, 0.55 x 7/8 = 0.49.
Question (3): What are the requirements for minimum attachment welds for the attachment of slip-on
flanges to nozzle necks? Are the double welded attachments per Fig. UA-48 of Section VIII, Division 1
to be considered mandatory? Are there any conditions under which a single weld (hubside only) is
permitted?
Reply (3): For slip-on flanges, the weld details are those shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (1) through (4),
Section VIII, Division 1. In those cases where the flange is attached by welds, two welds are required.
*With the publication of the 1980 Edition, Fig. UA-48 was redesignated as Fig. 2-4.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Attachment of Reinforcing Pad
File: BC80-431
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 permit the use of a reinforcing pad which does not lie
along the shell wall for its entire length and is attached only by a fillet weld to the shell wall at the outer
edge and by a fillet weld to the nozzle wall at the inner edge?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does require that a reinforcing pad conform to the wall surface
for its entire length and have a weld detail which attaches the inside edge of the pad to the shell close to
the nozzle wall when only a fillet weld is used. For examples of this, see Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (1) and
(m) which note attachment of "weld to shell" and "weld to pad," respectively. When this is not done, as
shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (n), both a groove weld and a fillet weld are required at the inner edge of
the pad.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-6(b)(4)
File: BC80-432
Question: Under the provisions of UCS-6(b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1, may SA-36, SA-283
Grades A, B, C, and D plate over 5/8 in. thick, or both be exempted when used for ring type flanges
attached to nozzle necks using attachment details as shown in Fig. UA-48* sketch (7), (8), (8a), (8b), or
(9)?
Reply: No. UCS-6(b)(4) limits steel plates to SA-36 and SA-283 for shells, heads, and nozzles
only.
*With the publication of the 1980 Edition, Fig. UA-48 was redesignated as Fig. 2-4.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 13-2(a)(3)
File: BC80-539
Question: Is it permissible to fabricate a vessel of rectangular cross section as depicted in Fig. 13-
2(a) sketch (3) of Section VIII, Division 1 with corners bent to a radius of less than three times the wall
thickness?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-52(b)(1)
Date Issued: October 16,1980
File: BC80-569
Question: Is it permissible under UW-52(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 when welding identical
vessels, individually of less than 50 ft. seam length , and using two welding operators, one welding the
longitudinal seam and the other circumferential seams, to have one spot radiograph represent each
welding operator?
Reply: Yes. One spot X-Ray for each 50 ft of longitudinal weld and one for each 50 ft of
circumferential weld satisfy the requirement of UW-52(b)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AD-912(b), Nonpressure Attachments
File: BC80-511
Question (1): For the attachment of a nonpressure part to a pressure part which meets the requirements
of AD-912(b) but is to be used only during the erection stage and will remain in place during operation,
may the 3/4 in. thickness limit be exceeded?
Reply (1): No. The requirements of AD-912(b) as well as the other requirements of Article D-9 of
Section VIII, Division 2 must be met regardless of the time of loading.
Question (2): If an attachment of a nonpressure part to a pressure part complies with the requirements
of AD-925 and AD-930 of Section VIII, Division 2, but the attachment is to be used only during erection,
may the nonpressure part attachment remain on the pressure part during operation?
Reply (2): Yes. An attachment of a nonpressure part to a pressure part may remain in place if the
design is shown to be adequate by meeting all of the applicable requirements of Article D-9 of Section
VIII, Division 2. Of course, certain welds as described in AD-925 may be exempt because of the
limitations of their use.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Pressure Vessel Design Life
File: BC80-512
Question: Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 for the consideration of
pressure vessel design life for vessels designed and fabricated to those rules?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not have a specific finite life requirement. If a specific life
is required, it must be a non-Code requirement given in the purchase order or the User's Design
Specification, neither of which is called for in a Code requirement in Section VIII, Division 1
For Section VIII, Division 2, as stated in AG-100(b)(1), the rules refer to the "useful life
of the vessel." This relates to design for a specific life which, for Division 2, must be described in the
User's Design Specification in AG-301.1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, Flange Calculations
File: BC80-454
Question: Is it permissible under the rules of Appendix 2, Section VIII, Division 1, when
fabrication of a vessel having standard pipe flanges is mated with reducing flanges to treat the reducing
flange as a standard flange when computing the reducing flange stress resulting from gasket seating
loads?
Reply: As stated in 2-5(b), there are no rules given for the design of flange pairs for Part A,
Flanges with Ring Type Gaskets. Consequently, the provisions of U-2(g) in Section VIII, Division 1 are
applicable
ATTENTION
The foregoing Interpretation has been further considered and the following corrected Reply sent
to the inquirer.
Correction Issued: November 17, 1980
Reply: As stated in 2-5(a)(2), there are no rules given for the design of flange pairs for Part A
Flanges with Ring Type Gaskets. However, after the loads for the most severe condition are determined,
the flanges shall be designed according to Appendix 2.
.Interpretation: VIII-80-108
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Material Usage
Date issued: October 28, 1980
File: BC80-549
Question: Is it acceptable under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to use material under SB-171
Grade 706 when previous to the Winter 1979 Addenda to Section II-Part A, the chemical requirements of
the Specification called out % "Nickel" and present requirements specify % "Nickel including Cobalt"?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AT-112
File: BC80-548
Question: Under the provisions of AT-112 of Section VIII, Division 2, when the material used in
the vessel fabrication undergoes an intermediate stress relief at a temperature lower than the final PWHT,
in addition to the final PWHT, must the test specimens which represent such material be subjected to such
intermediate stress relief in addition to the final PWHT?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(b)(1)(b) and (b)(1)(b)(2)
File: BC80-612
Question: Under the requirements of UG-116(b)(1)(b) and UG-116(b)(1)(b)(2) of Section VIII,

Division 1, what marking is required if only part of the vessel material, e.g., shell, has been impact tested
to UG-84 and the remainder, e.g., flanges and nozzles, have been waived for impact tests by UCS-66 or
UHA-51?
Reply: Add letters IT (UCS-66 or UHA-51) after the figures for minimum allowable temperature
when part of the vessel material has been impact tested and the remainder waived per UCS-66 or UHA-
51.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2(a), 2-4, Requirements of Category C Welds for Lethal
Services
File: BC79-680
Question (1) Is a lap joint stub end as illustrated in Fig. 2-4 sketch (1) the only acceptable flanged
connection under the requirements of UW-2(a)?
Reply (1) No. Other acceptable connections would include those of Fig. UW-13.3 and Fig. 2-4
sketches (5) and (6).
The following Questions apply to stub ends for lap joint flanges
Question(2): Is the weld joining a lap joint stub end to a nozzle neck or shell a Category B or C joint?
Reply (2): Category C, See UW-3(a)(3).
Question (3): Must the joint described in Question (2) always be fully radiographed?
Reply (3): No. See the diameter and thickness exceptions of UW-11(a)(4).
Question (4): Are the types of flanges described in 2-4(a)(1), i.e., sketches (1), (1a),(2), (3), and (4) of
Fig. 2-4, acceptable for lethal service?
Reply (4): (a) The lap joint stub end illustrated by sketch (1) would normally be connected by a but
weld which is not illustrated. If so, it would be acceptable provided all other applicable
requirements were satisfied.
(b) Sketches (la), (3), and (4) are not acceptable since they do not satisfy the requirement
of UW-2(a)(1)(b) that Category C joints be butt welds of Type No. (1) or (2).
(c) Use of the screwed flange of sketch (4) is not prohibited.
Question (5): UW-3(a)(3) addresses itself to Category C welds attaching "Van Stone laps" to nozzles.
.Does this mean the lap itself or is the intent that this be a lap joint stub end?
Reply (5) :Any welded joint connecting a flange to a nozzle neck is a Category C joint. See the
Replies to Questions (2) and (4) above. Also see Interpretations No. 3, VIII-78-08, which discusses this
overall subject in more detail.
File: BC80-635
Question: In testing a pressure vessel under the requirements of UG-100 of Section VIII, Division 1
may the provisions of UG-100(c) be waived and the pressure in the vessel be increased up to the required
test pressure without intermediate steps when a safety test chamber is used?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-39 Openings in Flat Heads
File: BC80-513
Question: May the minimum area of reinforcement as required in UG-39(b) of Section VIII,
Division 1 be taken as being the same as A = d(0.5t)?
Reply: Although the expression A = d(0.5t) is mathematically equal to the equation given in UG-
39(b) of A= 0.5dt, it is important to express the terms in the order given in UG-39)(b) to help establish
that the area removed is dt, but for flat head applications the area required for reinforcement is one-half of
the area removed. This gives the equation of A = 0.5dt
The t is the required thickness of the flat head according to UG-34 and the d is the diameter of the
.openings in the flat head.
Interpretations VIII-80-114
Subject.. Section VIII, Division 1, UW-37(f) and UW-37(f)(1)
Date issued: November 20,1980
File BC80-543
Question: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-37(f) and UW-37(f)(1) require welders of special welds
such as tube-to-tubesheet welds to be "properly qualified." Is it the intent of the “properly qualified”
statement to mean full performance qualification and documentation in accordance with all Section IX
requirements including the following of a qualified WPS for such performance qualifications?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig, UW-13.1 Sketch (k), Joggle Joint
File: BC90-556
Question: In Fig UW-13.1 sketch (k) of Section VIII, Division 1, is the “2 1/2t maximum” and “1t
minimum” applicable to the, “groove,” or the weld, or both?
Reply: It is the intent that the "groove" meet these requirements and then be completely filled
with weld metal.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2, UW-3, and UW-11
File: BC80-427
Question (1): Does the joint efficiency listed in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1 need to be
applied to the calculation of required thickness of ellipsoidal and torispherical head if they were formed
from a one piece (seamless) plate?
Reply (1): No. Appendix L, specifically L-1, of Section VIII, Division 1 sets forth examples which
illustrate the application of Code formulas and requirements for most possible variations. In reviewing
these examples, it will clarify questions concerning thickness calculations for shells and heads. It is also
suggested that the provisions of UW-12(b) and (c) be reviewed.
Question (2): When is the 80% factor on allowable stress as given in UW-12(c) applicable to the
calculation of required shell thickness?
Reply (2): The applicable examples in Appendix L of Section VIII, Division 1 will give you the
needed clarification.
Question (3): Would a steam receiver be classified as a unfired steam boiler?
Reply (3): Your question does not provide sufficient information for a complete answer. Some
possibilities are answered below:
(a) If the steam is generated in a Section I boiler, but the "steam receiver" is outside the limits of
boiler piping as defined in Fig. PG-58.3.1 of Section I, the vessel falls within the Scope of Section VIII,
Division 1. The requirements of UW-2(c) do not apply.
(b) If the steam is generated in or receives steam from a vessel as defined in U-1(g)(1) or (2), the
vessel is also within the Scope of Division 1. The requirements of UW-2(c) do not apply. As indicated by
footnote 1 to U-1, any applicable laws and regulations should be reviewed for requirements which are
different or more restrictive.
File: BC90-614
Question (1): Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 establishing weld joint
efficiencies, such as those of Table UW-12, for comer joints as shown in Fig. UW-13.2?
Reply (1): No. There are no criteria in Section VIII, Division 1 for establishing joint efficiencies for
comer joint attachments; only the C and ZC factors are required to determine the required thickness of the
flat plate in UG-34.
Question (2): What type of examination, if any, is required to be performed on the corner joint?
Reply (2): The NDE requirement is specified by the provisions outlined in UG-93(d)(3) and UW-
13(e), and the requirements for fillet welds as given in UW-.36.
Question (3): If full radiographic examinations or equivalent of the longitudinal shell joints in a vessel
are to be undertaken for whatever reasons, are corner joints according to Fig. UW-13.2 still allowable or
must one of the constructions allowing full radiography as per Fig. UW-13.2 be adopted?
Reply (3): Corner joints would be allowed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52(d) and UW-52(d)(2)(b)
File: BC80-642
Question (1): Under the requirements of UW-52 of Section VIII, Division 1 for spot radiography, a
vessel is spot examined. Where the vessel consists of two circumferential weld joints and one
longitudinal weld joint with a total weld length of less than 50 ft., must the entire weld length of the
circumferential and longitudinal weld joint in the vessel be rejected when the examination and retest of
UW-52(d)(2) and UW-52(d)(2)(b) are enforced?
Reply (1): Yes. For a vessel represented by one spot radiograph, the entire weld length of all
welded joints in the vessel would be rejected if the requirements of UW-52(d)(1) and UW-52(d)(2)(a)
could not be met see UW-52(d)(2)(b)].
Question (2): May a spot radiograph be taken in the first 18 in. increment of weld made by a welder in
a vessel which contains a total weld length of the welded joints of 50 ft.?
Reply (2): No. For a vessel that is to be represented by one spot radiograph in which one welder
joints with a total length of 50 ft, the entire 50 ft of weld shall be deposited before the spot radiograph can
be taken see UW-52(b)(3)]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-16.1 Sketch (w-3)
File: BC80-610
Question: Does an abutting nozzle satisfy the requirements of Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (w-3) of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. Sketch (w-3) represents an inserted nozzle. Abutting nozzles must meet the
requirements of UW-16(c)and Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (a), (b),and (r-1). In the case of small fittings, you
must meet the requirements of UW-16(g) and Fig. UW-16.2 sketch (m).
File: BC80-658
Question: In Reply (2)(a) of Code Case 1292-12, is the requirement of "not less than 24 in. in either
direction" applicable to both length and width of a representative panel?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UG-116(j)
File: BC80-287
Question: If a Manufacturer (ASME Certificate of Authorization holder) of a Section VIII, Division

1 pressure vessel tack welds fittings, such as nozzles and couplings, into a shell, or head, or both of a
vessel, and then subcontracts the completion of these welds to another Manufacturer who is also an
ASME "U" symbol holder, is it a requirement for the subcontractor to stamp each weld as per UG-116(l),
or can the required marking be in accordance with UG-116(j)?
Reply: The requirements of UG-116(j) and (1) have no relationship to the described
circumstances. These paragraphs apply to the marking of the completed vessel, which is the
responsibility of the vessel Manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-37 Through UG-41
File: BC80-554
Question: Is it permissible under the nozzle reinforcement requirements of UG-37 through UG-41
of Section VIII, Division-1 to take the wall-increased part of a nozzle as nominal thickness of the nozzle
in the reinforcement calculation when the wall increased part extends beyond the allowable reinforcing
limit, measured normal to the vessel wall?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32(h), Conical Reducer
File: BC80-605
Question: Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 when designing a conical shell
reducer section for the transition knuckle forming the cone-to-small cylinder junction under internal
pressure, and when the half apex angle is greater than 30 deg?
Reply: There are no specific requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 for the design of the small
end of the cone-to-cylinder junction under internal pressure, and when the half apex angle is greater than
30 deg. It shall be the responsibility of the vessel Manufacturer to ensure the adequacy of design and to
have such design acceptable to his Authorized Inspector.
File: BC80-681
Question: Is there any requirement under the rules of UG-99 in Section VIII, Division 1 for a
minimum time that the hydrostatic test pressure must be applied?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-37(c)(1)
Date issued: December 18, 1980
File: BC80-682
Question: Is it the intent of UG-37(c)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1 that the value of tr to be used in
this analysis be determined by following the steps laid down in UG-28 where tr is the minimum thickness
which is acceptable at P, the external design pressure?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(f)
File: BC90-609
Question: If a vessel is constructed under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 and meets the
requirements of UW-11(c) and UW-12(c) for no radiography, what marking under UG-116(f) is required?
Reply: There are no requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 for marking the vessel when the
vessel meets the requirements for no radiography under UW-11(c) and UW-12(c); however, the
Manufacturer's Data Report Form shall show that no radiography was performed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(f) and UG-116(g)
File: BC80-757
Question: Do the marking requirements of UG-116(f) and (g) apply to a pressure part marked under
the provisions of UG-116(i)?
Reply: No. The provisions of UG-116(f)(1), (2) ,(3), and (4) and UG-116(g)(1)and(2)apply to
marking for the whole pressure vessel. Pressure parts need comply only with the marking provisions of
UG-116(i) due to the fact that radiography and heat treatment requirements would be recorded on the
Manufacturer's Partial Data Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SA-675 Bar Material for External Pressure
File: BC80-218
Question: May steam ejectors constructed of SA-675 bar stock be used in Division 1 construction
Reply: Steam ejectors constructed of SA-675 bar stock may not be used in Division 1
construction due to the fact that SA-675 is not a Code approved material for a shell under external
pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix Y, Allowable Bolt Stresses
Date Issue: April 9, 1981
File: BC79-502
Question: Is it permissible under Division 1 to allow the use of higher allowable stresses for
calculating the amount of bolting required for Appendix Y flanges as compared with Appendix 2 flanges?
Reply: There is no justification for permitting higher allowable stresses for calculating the
amount of bolting required for Appendix Y flanges as compared with Appendix 2 flanges.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions l and 2, UG-136 and AR-210, Materials for Pressure Relief
Valves
File: BC79-766
Question: The body of a safety relief valve is being fabricated using ASTM B 124 UNS C37700,
which is not listed in either Section II or Division 1 or 2 of Section VIII. Also, this material is not listed
under Case 1750.-2 which applies to valves. May a safety relief valve fabricated of this material be
stamped with the UV Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply: Division 1, UG-136, and Division 2, AR-210, require materials used in bodies and
bonnets or yokes to be listed in both Section II and either Division 1 or 2 of Section VIII, depending upon
use. The material is not permitted under the special provisions of Case 1750.2. Therefore, the safety
relief valve described in the Question could not be stamped with the UV Code Symbol Stamp.
File: BC80-185
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-77(a), is it permissible to transfer heat

numbers to satisfy material identification?
Reply: Transfer of heat numbers alone is not adequate. Where "coded markings" are not used,
UG-77(a) requires the transfer of "the original identification markings required in the specifications for
the material." Where required by the material specification, heat numbers must be included.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 13
File: BC80-555
Question (1): For a rectangular box header constructed from four side plates as shown in Fig. 13-2(a)
sketches (1) and (2), is it correct to classify the welds at the corners as "Category C butt" in order to
determine an efficiency from UW-12?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In the example of 13-16(e), the value of E= 0.8 is used in the calculations for S m of the
corner section CD, (Sb)C-D, (Sb)C, (Sb)D, and (Sb)E although it is specifically indicated that there are no weld
joints at those locations. Is it not correct to use E =1.0 in this case?
Reply (2): Although there is no specific weld joint efficiency, UW-12(c) requires that the stress used
in calculations be 80% of the allowable Stress from Subsection C for parts of vessels that are neither fully
radiographed nor spot-radiographed. For those vessels which are designed according to Table UW-12,
column (c), the joint efficiency is taken directly from that Table depending upon the type of joint without
the added stress factor of 0.8 which is already incorporated into the weld joint efficiency of column (c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Expansion Joints
File: BC80-634
Question (1) When an expansion joint is welded to a Division 1 pressure vessel, does it become an
integral part of the shell?
Reply (1): An expansion joint may be an integral part of a Division 1 pressure vessel if it satisfies all
the requirements of Code Case 1177-7.
Question (2): If it becomes an integral part of the shell cylinder, should the expansion joint material be
the same thickness as the shell?
Reply (2): Code Case 1177-7 waives the minimum thickness requirements for expansion joints, and,
therefore, if the design satisfies the Code Case design criteria, the expansion joint may be less than the
thickness of a shell component to which it is attached.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(b)(2)
File: BC80-697
Question: For a pressure vessel fabricated of SA-516 Grade 65 material having a design
temperature of -38 C, shall Charpy impact tests for the welds and heat affected zones be conducted at -
38 C or at the temperature indicated for the base material in SA-20, Table 16?
Reply: It is the minimum design temperature of the vessel stated in the Data Report and included
in the vessel stamping that will determine the impact test temperature of the weld and heat affected zone
and base material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Effective Dates
Date Issued: April I0,1981
File: BC80-750
Question (1): Are all of the applicable requirements of a specific Addenda of Division 1 mandatory for
vessels contracted for six months subsequent to publication of that Addenda?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, are the requirements of Appendix 13 of Division 1
mandatory, when applicable, for design of vessels which have previously been designed by other methods
[UG-19(b)] or proof testing [UG-19(c)]?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC80-758
Question: Is it the intent of UW-35(c) to limit the as-welded height to those in that paragraph, and if
so, can any excess weld over that height be ground to within limits?
Reply: It is the intent of UW-35(c) that weld grooves be completely filled. It also places a limit
on the height of finished weld (weld reinforcement). Appropriate grinding may be required to meet the
specified limits for weld reinforcement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32 Conical Reducer
File: BC80-761
Question: Are there any rules in Division 1 for designing a conical head or transition under internal
pressure when the half apex angle is greater than 30 deg?
Reply: There are no specific formulas in Division 1 for designing a conical head or transition
under internal pressure when the half apex angle is greater than 30 deg. The method of analysis is given
in 1-5(e), but the Certificate of Authorization holder is responsible for the design under the provisions of
U-2(g).
Interpretation-. VIII 81-12

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 14-10.5 Weld Joint Efficiency for Dimpled Panels
File: BC80-780
Question: Is it required that a weld joint efficiency factor of 0.8 be used in formula UG-
101(m)(2)(a) for establishing the MAWP of dimpled panels attached by fillet welds around 1 in. diameter
holes at the dimpled root?
Reply: Yes. See provisions of 14-10-5(a)(1) and (2).
Interpretations. VIII-81-13
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 7-3(a)(4)(d)
Date Issued; April 10, 1981
File: BC80-781
Question: Shall all nonlinear indications over 3/32 in. detected by liquid penetrant examination be
removed as called for under 7-3(a)(4)(d)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Part ULW and Article D-11
File: BC81-2
Question (1): In fabricating layered vessels under the requirements of Part ULW of Division 1 and
Article D-11 of Division 2, can the total number of proposed layers be reduced when the minimum
required metal thickness is achieved?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If all the plates used have a negative tolerance, can they still be used in fabrication
without additional thickness requirements?
Reply (2): No, unless the total metal thickness obtained equals or exceeds the total required metal
thickness less 0.01 in.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. 5-UCS-28.2 and Table 5-UCS-28.2
File: BC81-18
Question: Is it permissible to exceed the maximum temperature listed in Fig. 5-UCS-28.2 and Table
5-UCS-28.2 when designing for external pressure?
Reply: No. See UG-20(c).

Interpretation- VIII-81-16 (Void See 81-16R Vol. 16, pg. 167 ]
Date Issued April 10, 1981
File: BC81-19
Question: May an ultrasonic examination, in accordance with UW-53, be utilized to confirm the
validity of the radiographs and the integrity of welds?
Reply: No.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UG-1 19, Requirements for Nameplates
File: BC80-656
Question (1): May nameplates contain data, such as corrosion allowance, the purchase order number,
drawing numbers, and the name of the purchaser, in addition to the markings required by the Code?
Reply (1): Yes, provided that the additional data is factual and applicable to the pressure vessel
Question (2): May the additional data of Question (1) be mixed with the Code required markings?
Reply (2): No. As indicated by UG-119(a), the Code required marking shall be arranged
substantially as shown in Fig. UG-118. The additional data shall be below the Code required marking.
Question (3): May a vessel manufacturer mark a nameplate, including application of his Code Symbol
Stamp, which has been furnished by the purchaser and which contains additional data as indicated in
Question (1)?
Reply (3): Yes, provided all applicable Code rules are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-40 and L-7
File: BC80-719
Question: What is the intent of the manufacturing tolerance tn. in calculating nozzle wall thickness
for reinforcement as given in UG-40 and L-7?
Reply: When pipe is used as a nozzle neck, it is not necessary to consider the 12 1/2% mill
tolerance when calculating reinforcement required for openings per UG-37, UG-40, and the example in L-
7. The reason for the tolerance on the pipe is to accommodate the possible shifting of the dies during the
manufacturing process. Since the nozzle reinforcement is based on an area replacement method, although
the pipe may be thinner on one side of the center line, it will probably be correspondingly thicker on the
other side.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UF-I Certification and Stamping of Rolls for Corrugated Paper
Machinery
File: BC80-187
Question: A supplier manufactures rolls for corrugating paper machinery to SA-649, including the
journal seal welding permitted by 4.6 of SA-649, and supplies them to a U symbol holder who initially
designs, completes construction, including final machining and final hydrostatic testing, prepares the
Code Manufacturers Data Report, and applies the Code Symbol under the provisions of UF-7. Is it
sufficient for the supplier to provide only the certified material test reports as required by SA-649, or does
a Partial Data Report Form U-2 have to be provided as well?
Reply: A Partial Data Report is not required. Rolls furnished to SA-649 under the provisions of
UF-7 are furnished as material. The rolls shall be marked and test reports shall be furnished as required
by SA-649.
File: BC90-611
Question (1): Is postweld heat treatment per Table UCS-56 required for P-No. 1 materials for a pipe
neck welded to a slip-on or ring type flange per Fig. 2-4 sketch (3), when the maximum fillet weld throat
is not over 1/2 in. and the finished inside diameter of the pipe is over 2 in.?
Reply (1): For this situation, the need for postweld heat treatment is controlled by the thickness of
the nozzle neck [see UCS 56(d)(5)]; therefore, postweld heat treatment is not required unless the
thickness of the nozzle neck exceeds 1 1/2 in. provided that a minimum preheat of 200 F is applied when
the thickness of the neck exceeds 1 1/4 in.
Question (2): If all conditions in Question (1) were the same except that the finished inside diameter of
the pipe is 2 in. or less, would postweld heat treatment be required?
Reply (2): See Reply (1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, M-5
File: BC81-3
Question: M-5(a) states, "A vessel, in which pressure can be generated because of service
conditions, may have a full area stop valve between it and its pressure relieving device for inspection and
repair purposes only." What is the intent of the Code with regard to the definition of the term "service
conditions?"
Reply: The purpose of the quoted wording is to separate the provisions of M-5(a) from the
provisions of M-5(b). If pressure can be generated in the vessel due to any service condition, the
provisions of M-5(a) apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Appendix 8 and Article 9-2
File: BC81-22
Question: Is it acceptable to apply the rules of Appendix 8 in Division 1 and Article 9-2 in Division
2 when visible defects as stated in UW-38 and AF-251 are present?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(h)
File: BC81-67
Question: If a vessel meets the requirements of UCS-66(c)(2), does that exempt it from the impact
test provisions for the welding procedure test plates as given in UG-84(h)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Part ULW and Article D-11 Low Temperature Service
File: BC81-68
Question: Is it permissible for layered pressure vessels constructed under the requirements of Part
ULW and Article D-11 in Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, to operate at low temperatures, below -20 F?
Reply: Yes, if all of the appropriate design and fabrication requirements, including impact test
provisions, in the respective Section VIII, Divisions are met.
File: BC81-87
Question: Can a nozzle, which is welded through a shell with a full penetration weld, claim the
inside projection as per UG-40, if there is no fillet weld on the inside of the shell?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-81-27 (Void See 81-27R Vol. 13, Pg. 49 ]

Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UW-42
Date Issued: June 2, 1981-
File: BC81-100
Question: Is postweld heat treatment per UCS-56 required for UW-42(b) fabrication when P-No. 1
material is used and the thickness limit does not go beyond 1 1/2 in.?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UG-37 and UG-40
File: BC81-106
Question: May a second reinforcing pad of a smaller diameter than that attached initially to a vessel
and nozzle be added to the initial pad, and additionally attached to the nozzle, provided attachment welds
meet the requirement of the Code, the area of all pads and welds being contained within the limits of UG-
40, and such area supplies only that required by UG-37?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)
File: BC81-128
Question: Under the exemption requirements of U-1(c), may a pressure vessel meeting one of those
exemptions still be fabricated to the Code rules even though it falls outside of the Scope?
Reply: Yes. See U-1(i).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52(b)(1)
File: BC81-129
Question: In constructing a pressure vessel which contains a seamless head attached to a welded
shell by a joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (k), is it permissible to perform spot radiography per
UW-52(b)(1) on the shell seam without radiographing the head-to-shell joint?
Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of UW-52(b)(2) and (3) are complied with.
Subject: Section VIII-Division 1, UW-16 Requirements for Attachment Welds, 1974 Edition
File: BC81-133
Question: For a vessel fabricated under the 1974 Edition of Division 1, are the minimum weld size
requirements in UW-16 based on actual thickness and not minimum design thickness?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-17
Question: Does a pressure vessel that contains water, has a capacity of less than 120 gallons, and
also contains hydrogen in a process flow fall under the provisions of U-1(c)(6)?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-23
Question: Under the requirements of UG-25(e), must the depth of a telltale hole be equal to or
greater than 80% of the thickness of a seamless shell of similar dimensions?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-24
Question: Under the requirements of UW-11(d), electroslag welds in ferritic materials are required
to be ultrasonically examined. Does this apply also to electrogas welds?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-92
Question: UG-102(a) states in part, "An indicating gage shall be connected directly to the vessel. If
the indicating gage is not readily visible to the operator controlling the pressure applied, an additional
indicating gage shall be provided where it will be visible to the operator throughout the duration of the
test. Could the indicating pressure gage required by the first quoted sentence be located on the test
fluid supply piping, perhaps 30 ft from the vessel, provided there was no block valve between the
indicating pressure gage and the vessel and provided the calculated pressure drop at maximum flow rates
between the indicating gage and the vessel did not exceed 1 psi?
Reply: No. The requirements of the first quoted sentence are to prohibit sole reliance on a single
pressure gage located as described in the Question. The gage described in the Question appears to be
applicable to the requirements of the second quoted sentence,
File: BC81-101
Question: Under the requirements of UW-40(d), it is permitted to perform a preliminary hydrostatic

test to detect leaks prior to postweld heat treatment. May the rules of UG-99 be used in performing such
a test?
Reply: Yes, the applicable requirements of UG-99 may be used. However, the rules do not
establish the preliminary test pressure to be used under the provisions of UW-40(d). The Manufacturer
shall determine the test pressure to be used.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32 and 1-5(e)
File: BC80-128
Question (1): May the large end of a toriconical reducer, as shown in Fig. UG-36 sketch (b), with a
knuckle. that meets the requirements for rL and with a half-apex angle (greater than 30 deg., be designed
using the formulas given in UG-32(g) and (h) only?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the design of reinforcement at the small end of reducers whose half-apex angle
(exceeds 30 deg., may the design rules other than those specified in 1-5(e) be used in Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes. Rules other than those specified in 1-5(e) may be used [see U-2(g)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99 Repair of Leaks in Two-Sided Partial Penetration
Nozzle Welds
File: BC80-130
Question: A Division 1 vessel has nozzles attached by fillet welds or fillet plus partial penetration
groove welds on both sides of the shell as in Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (d), (e-1), (e-2), and (f). The nozzles
do not have reinforcing plates or saddles, which, under the requirements of UW-15(b), would provide a
telltale hole to permit independent testing of the soundness of the inside welds. Prior to testing, the welds
have been visually examined for defects. Code Case 1518 has been applied, and for vessels to be
pneumatically tested, the examination of UW-50 has not been made.
If the hydrostatic or pneumatic test does not indicate leakage of such a joint, the vessel is
acceptable, even though a leak could exist in one side of the joint.
If such a joint does leak and the outside of the joint is repaired, is the vessel acceptable, without
further examination and possible repair of the inside of the joint, if the vessel passes a subsequent
pressure test?
Reply: No. The comparison to the acceptability of the vessel when no leak is found is not valid If
a leak as described is found, either it must be located and repaired or the nozzle must be removed and
replaced. In either case, the vessel must be subjected to another pressure test.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, ULW-17 and UHT-82
File: BC80-650
Question (1): For pressure vessels fabricated by layered construction to Part ULW, there is no
requirement for production test coupons for the layers. When using quenched and tempered steel for the
layers, is it required that production impact tests of the heat affected zone be performed per UHT-82, even
though the welds are not subject to quenching or normalizing followed by tempering?
Reply (1): Yes. ULW-1 requires that the rules of UHT-82(c) be met.
Question (2): ULW-17(k) states that for Category D joints for nozzles in layered shells the welds shall
be full penetration except as otherwise stated. Please advise whether a partial penetration weld for a 14
in. nozzle located tangentially to the cylindrical shell is acceptable.
Reply (2): No. A partial penetration weld is not acceptable for nozzles over 6 in. nominal pipe size.
See ULW-18(c) for limits on partial penetration welds.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 14-10.7(a)(2)
Date issued: June 30, 1981
File: BC80-762
Question: Is it permissible, under the requirements of 14-10.7, to use materials within the same P-
grouping of materials listed in Table 14-10.3 without conducting another test plate if one performs
appropriate workmanship samples to assure weld nugget quality?
Reply: For construction in which the dimpling or embossing of the plate or plates is performed
before the spot welding, or seam welding, or both, the required burst proof test for procedure and
performance qualification for each welding process using material of one of the allowable specifications
in each grouping of materials in Table 14-10.3 will qualify for any other material in that grouping. On the
other hand, for construction in which the dimpling or embossing of the plate or plates is performed after
the spot or seam welds are made, the required burst proof test for procedure and qualification for each
welding process must be performed on each specification, type, thickness, and grade of material for either
sheet of both sheets. The permitted Materials are again listed in Table 14-10.3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-90(c)(2) Manual Revision
File: BC81-84
Question (1) When a revision is Proposed for a UG-90(c)(2) manual concerning the changing of
sample forms located in the index section, does this type of change require prior approval by the National
Board or can the local Authorized Inspector make this decision?
Reply (1): As stated in UG-90(c)(2), the test is whether the proposed changes in the inspection and
quality control procedure affect the satisfaction of the requirements of Division 1. If the proposed changes
clearly do not affect such satisfaction, the Authorized Inspector may accept them. Otherwise the changes
must be reviewed and accepted by the parties specified in UG-90(c)(2).
Question (2): When a revision is proposed for a UG-90(c)(2) manual concerning the addition to a
procedure which does not take away from the original content, does this type of change require approval
by the National Board or can the local Authorized Inspector make this decision?
Reply (2): The same as Reply (1).
File: BC81-131
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-99 to allow the coating of a vessel prior to
performing the hydrostatic test?
Reply: Yes.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.2, and UW-18
File: BC79-206
Question (1): Figure UW-13.2 sketch (g) shows fillet welds attaching plates to flat heads. Does this
violate UW-18(b)?
Reply (1): No. The requirements of UW-18(b) for independent support of single fillet welded corner
or tee joints pertains to fillet welded corners, such as shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (o), (p), and (q),
and not to the double fillet welding shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (g) and (i).
Question (2): How is the fillet weld efficiency of 55% in UW-18(d) used in weld strength calculations?
Reply (2): The allowable load per unit length of fillet weld is equal to the minimum leg dimension
times the allowable stress value in tension of material being welded together by fillet weld times 0.55.
File: BC79-330
Question: Is it permissible to use a seamless shell in a vessel calculated under UW-12(c) in order to
eliminate the corrosion allowance required by UCS-25?
Reply: Yes.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, Monitoring of Welded Variables During Fabrication
File: BC80-299
Question (1): For Division 1 fabrication, must heat input be constantly monitored during production
welding when notch toughness is a consideration?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For Division 1 fabrication, is it required to constantly monitor the width, frequency, or
dwell time of oscillation when QW-410.7 of Section IX is an applicable supplementary essential variable?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 14, Jacketed Assemblies, and U-2(g)
File: BC80-326
Question: When single embossed, jacketed assemblies, such as described in Appendix 14, are used
as shells subjected to external pressure loading on the embossed side, may properties of the embossed
assembly be considered when determining the required thickness of the flat plate for the external
pressure?
Reply: Yes. The geometry covered by your inquiry is not specifically covered by any of the
rules of Division 1. However, the rules of U-2(g) shall apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-8 and UW-29, Use of Finned Tubing
File: BC80-467
Question: Under what conditions may a manufacturer procure treat exchanger tubes with resistance
welded fins from an outside organization, when the tubes are to be used in the construction of a Division
1 pressure vessel?
Reply: Tubing with resistance welded fins fabricated by an outside organization may be used in
the construction of a Division 1 pressure vessel under the provisions of UG-8, with the welding of the
extended surface under the provisions of UW-28 and UW-29.
Interpretation: VIII-81-49 Void -See 81-49R Vol. 12]
Subject Section VIII, Division 2, Table ABM-1

File: BC80-725
Question: Does Table ABM-1 refer to raised face and flanges with full face gaskets only?
Reply: Table ABM-1 has allowable bolting stresses for flanges designed in accordance with
Appendix 3. The Code does not prohibit the use of other types of bolted connections such as flanges
using full face gaskets or other means of fixing or clamping the flange at the bolt circle to provide
effective restraint against flange deflection. Such designs may be used provided they are designed in
accordance with good engineering practice and the method of design is acceptable to the Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 UG-29(a)
File: BC81-138
Question: Are the required moments of inertia Is, and I, and Is,' and I', as given in UG-29(a),
restricted to multi ring and single ring designs, respectively?
Reply: No. Each may apply to either multi ring or single ring designs.
The moments Is, and I are used when no part of the shell is counted as part of the stiffening ring,
and Is' and I' are used when part of the shell is counted together with the stiffening ring. There can be
overlap for that part of the shell which is counted on either side of the stiffening ring; however, it shall be
counted only once.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UHA-51(b)(5)
File: BC81-193
Question: May Type 304L material be exempted from impact testing, if it meets all of the
requirements of UHA-51(b)(5)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(c)(4)(b)
File: BC81-194
Question: In complying with the impact test requirements in UG-84, are there any requirements for
the minimum absorbed energy when using materials per Table UHA-23?
Reply: No. For materials specified in Table UHA-23, the minimum lateral expansion
requirements in UG-84(c)(4)(b) are applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 UG-84(g)(2)
File: BC81-248
Question: Under the requirement of UG-84(g)(2) for testing material (e.g., SA-517 Grade E) in the
heat affected zone, must any part of the notch be required to transverse the actual fusion line when the
notch is located to include as much of the heat affected zone as possible?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66(c)(2)(b)
File: BC80-718
Question (1): For vessels designed according to Division 1 which are to operate at temperatures below-
20 F and to use materials conforming to Table UCS-23 when the provision for 2 1/2 times design
pressure is used to waive impact tests, is there any low temperature limit?
Reply (1): No. See UCS-66(c)(2).
Question (2): For a vessel designed as in Question (1), does the Code require any special changes if the
actual impact readings required by contract result in answers that are low?
Reply (2): The Code does not address contractual requirements.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Part UW, Weld Strength in Head to Shell Connection
File: BC80-721
Question: A pressure vessel is constructed to Division 1 requirements with a multilayered shell and
dished head. The head is constructed of SA-516 Grade 70 steel, and the shell is constructed of a higher
strength steel. Is it permissible to attach the head to shell with weld metal with a strength equivalent to
the head material?
Reply: Yes. See QW-153.1(b) of Section IX.
File: BC81-4
'Question: Can vessels used for the containment and transport of uranium hexafluoride be
constructed under Division 1 without having inspection openings per UG-46(a)?
Reply: Under UG-25, it is the responsibility of the user or his designated agent to decide if a
vessel can be considered to be in noncorrosive service, or if a corrosion allowance should be specified.
If in noncorrosive service, inspection openings may be omitted, but the statement "for
noncorrosive service" shall be included under remarks on the Manufacturer’s Data Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-13(f)
File: BC81-32
Question: When hubs are integrally forged or machined from a forging used for a tubesheet or flat
head according to Division 1, is a tension test specimen required?
Reply: Yes. See UW-13(f) and Fig. UW-13.3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-18(b)(1)
File: BC81-33
Question: May a nozzle designed in accordance with Fig. UHT-18.2 Sketch (a) or (b), but on the in-
side of the vessel, so that the design pressure is external to the nozzle, be exempted from the requirements
of UHT-18(b)(1) and radiography of the nozzle to shell joint?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UW-11(a)(5)
File: BC81-41
Question (1): When is full radiography a requirement for a Category D joint for a vessel constructed of
carbon, or low-alloy steel, or both under Part UCS?
Reply (1): You are referred to UW-11, UW-12, Table UW-12, and Fig, UW-16.1. The Code
requires that all butt welds in a vessel, or vessel part, designed under the provisions of E = 1.0, be
radiographed. Therefore a vessel part designed under UW-11(a) incorporating nozzles as illustrated in
Fig. UW-16.1(q-1), (q-2), (q-3), or (q-4) requires radiography of the butt welds between the vessel wall
and the nozzle. If the nozzle design follows any of the other partial or full penetration welds, with or
without pads, illustrated in Fig. UW-16.1, radiography of the, attachment weld is not a requirement of the
Code.
Question (2): May fillet welds be considered for strength purposes under Division 1 fabrication?
Reply (2): Yes. See UW-18, and Table UW-12, Types 4, 5, and 6.
File: BC81-45
Question: What is the required area of reinforcement for openings in single walled vessels subjected
to external pressure for Division 1?
Reply: As stated in UG-37(c)(1), the required area of reinforcement is equal to:
A = 0.5dtrF'
where d = diameter of opening

tr = required thickness of shell due to external pressure
F = factor for plane examined
The area of reinforcement available in the shell and the nozzle is that calculated according to UG-40 with
tr and trn being the required thicknesses of the shell and nozzle, respectively.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 Table 2-5.2 and 2-5(c), Gasket Factors
File: BC81-46
Question: May gasket factors other than those given in Table 2-5.1 be used for the design of
flanges?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-47
Question: If the bevel option is used in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (k), does the dimension 2 1/2t
maximum and t minimum pertain to the distance from a vertical line extending from the root of the weld
to the top edge of the offset plate?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, ULW-77(d)
File: BC81-63
Question: What is the intent of the first sentence of the second paragraph of ULW-77(d), which
reads, "The gap area Ag shall not exceed the thickness of a layer expressed in square inches"?
Reply: The intent of the first sentence of the second paragraph of ULW-77(d) is that the gap area
Ag be less than or equal to the thickness of a layer t times a unit length, which is expressed in square
inches.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UNF-58(c)
File: BC81-70
Question: If a vessel or vessel part meets the requirements for spot radiography under UW-52, do
those same joints require liquid penetrant examination as required by UNF-58(c)?
Reply: Yes. UNF-58(c) provides for exclusion for stated materials only if full radiography is
conducted.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32(c) and UW-12(c), Joint Efficiency Factors
File: BC81-96
Question: What is the value for E to be used in calculating the thickness of a seamless ellipsoidal
head that will be installed in a shell in accordance with Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (a) when no radiography is
to be performed in the construction?
Reply: You are referred to UG-32(c) and UW-12(c). Since the head is seamless, the value of E
to be used in the formula for calculating the thickness would be 1.0. Since a butt weld does not exist
between the head and the shell and no radiography is performed, the requirements of UW-12(c) apply and
it will be necessary that the S value be multiplied by 0.8. For longitudinal stresses E = 0.45, see Table
UW-12.
File: BC81-164
Question: A vessel Manufacturer supplies transition elements, rolled plate with a welded
longitudinal seam, to an expansion joint manufacturer who subsequently welds an expansion joint to
them. The completed assembly is then returned to the vessel Manufacturer for further processing into the
vessel. Does the vessel Manufacturer have to supply a Partial Data Report for the code work performed
by him to the expansion joint manufacturer if the expansion joint manufacturer provides a Partial Data
Report in accordance with Code Case 1177-7?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-98, UG-125(c),UG-126(d), and UG-134(e)
File: BC81-1 65
Question: In determining the maximum allowable working pressure as defined in UG-98, do the set
pressure set tolerances of relief devices, such as defined in UG-126(d) and UG-134(e), and the pressure
increase after the relief device opens, as defined in UG-125(c), need to be taken into account?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-199
Question: Under the requirements of UCS-66, may SA-193 B7 bolts less than 2 1/2 in.. in diameter
be utilized for temperature down to-50 F without impact testing?
Reply: No, unless exempted by UCS-66(c)(1) or (c)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Tables UHT-23 and AQT-1, and Figs. UHT-18.2 and
AD-610.1.
File: BC80-142
Question: For materials of Table UHT-23 or Table, AQT-1, may nozzle constructions as depicted in
Figs. UHT-18.2 and AD-610.1 be used when the shell plate thickness is 2 in. or less?
Reply: As defined in UHT-17(b), certain materials may use Fig. UHT-18.2 for all thicknesses.
Otherwise, this Figure may not be used for shell plate thicknesses 2 in, or less. For Division 2 vessels,
Fig. AD-610.1 may not be used for shell plate thicknesses 2 in. or less.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11(a)(1), UG-11(c)(1), and UG-11(c)(2)
File: BC80-404
Question: A hinged closure is secured by multiple, hinged T bolts and incorporates welding. May
such a closure be used in a Division 1 pressure vessel as a parts Manufacturer's welded standard pressure
part without authorized inspection of the part, material identification in accordance with UG-93, or a
Partial Data Report, provided that the requirements of UG-11(c) are satisfied?
Reply: The present rules do not prohibit use as defined in the Question.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Torispherical Heads
File: BC80-604
Question: Does Division 1 provide specific criteria for acceptance of material laminations and for
welded repair of material?
Reply: Division 1 requires that material comply with a specification contained in the appropriate
stress table. Acceptable plate specifications reference SA-20, which addresses material quality in 9.
UG-79(a) requires that the process used in forging heads shall not unduly impair the physical
properties of the material.
UG-78 contains provisions for minor repairs to material by the vessel Manufacturer,
File: BC80-645
Question: Under what conditions may the minimum thickness of shells, made from seamless pipe of
materials listed in Table UCS-23, for double pipe heat exchangers used in compressed air service, steam
service, or water service, be 1/16 in. exclusive of any corrosion allowances?
Reply: None. If any parts are to be constructed to Code rules under Division 1, including parts
of double pipe heat exchangers that are to be used in compressed air, steam, or water service, then the
3/32 in. thickness limitation of UG-16(b)(6) shell apply.
Subject: Section VIII Divisions 1 and 2, UCS-56(d) and AF-402.3(a)
File: BC81-14
Question: When applying the requirements of UCS-56(d) and AF-402.3 for PWHT, which
thickness governs when you have a fabricated head attached to a shell of greater thickness?
Reply: Under the provisions of UCS-56(d)(1) and AF-402.3(a), the thinner of the two parts
governs, provided the PWHT requirements of the weld joints in the fabricated head and shell are satisfied.
File: BC81-94
Question (1): In Division 1, what specific rules are given for the design of tubesheets?
Reply (1): In Division 1, the only direct references to tubesheets are given in nonmandatory
Appendix A and Appendix AA giving the basis for establishing allowable loads for tube-to-tubesheet
joints, and in UW-13 and Fig. UW-13.2, where details of corner joints for the tubesheets with and without
a bolting flange are given. Also, reinforcement requirements for openings in flat heads are given in UG-
39. Except for those rules noted above, there are no rules given for the calculation of tubesheets, so U-
2(g) applies.
Question (2): In Division 1, may flanges with or without hubs be fabricated from flat plates?
Reply(2): See UG-14, UW-13(e), 2-1(c), and 2-2(d)(2) for conditions under which it may be done.
Question (3): In Division 1, what rules apply to floating head covers under external pressure?
Reply (3): In Division 1, rules are given in 1-6 for circular spherically dished heads with bolting
flanges both concave and convex to pressure.
File: BC81-102
Question: A carbon steel vessel is to be designed according to Division 1 for two different
conditions of coincident design pressure and temperature. One condition is design pressure of 10 psig
and design temperature of-50 F. The other condition is design pressure of 285 psig and design
temperature of 650 F. Are impact tests required under the provisions of Part UCS?
Reply: UCS-66(c)(2) states that no impact test is required when the minimum thickness is the
greater of those determined for the more severe of the two conditions of coincident pressure and
temperature. For the example in question, those two conditions are:
(a) 285 psi at 650 F, using the allowable stress at 650 F
(b) 2 1/4 times 10 psi at -50 F, using the allowable stress at -20 F
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2(a)(1)(b)
File: BC81-263
Question: May a Category C weld joint utilize the tubesheet-to-shell or tubesheet-to-channel details
of Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (h), (i), (j), (k), or (1) without radiography or dye penetrant examination?
Reply: If there are no special service restrictions such as lethal, which requires the Category C
joints to be, butt joints, or any other special limits, the Category C joint may be made without radiography
or dye penetrant examination.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-34(c)(3), Eqs. (3) and (5)
File: BC81-259
Question: When applying Eqs. (3) or (5) of UG-34(c)(3) for the thickness determination of flat
unstayed rectangular covers attached by bolts that may or may not cause an edge moment, is it permitted
to use a maximum allowable stress which is 1 1/2 times the appropriate stress value in the tables of
Subsection C?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-40(e) and UCS-56(d), PWHT Requirements
File: BC80-515
Question: Is it the intent of the Code when establishing PWHT requirements for vessels of different
thicknesses, based on the statements of UW-40(e) and UCS-56(d), to preserve the mechanical properties
of the thinner material or to assure full relief of stresses in the thicker material?
Reply: It is the intent of the Code when establishing PWHT requirements for all vessels to
preserve the mechanical properties and to obtain stress relief of the materials. A vessel with varying
thicknesses of material must be postweld heat treated based on the greatest nominal thickness of any
welded joint in the vessel when the entire vessel is postweld heat treated in a closed furnace. The same is
true for vessels of different thicknesses when postweld heat treated in the same closed furnace charge. In
either case, the requirements of UCS-85(b) must be met for all material, including the thinner material,
except as modified by UCS-56(d), (e), and (f).
UW-40(e) allows for the PWHT of multiple vessels or parts of vessels in the same furnace charge
based on the PWHT requirements of the thickest vessel for the reason of economy to the Manufacturer,
but does not eliminate the requirements of UW-40, UCS-56, or UCS-85.
UCS-56(d) establishes the thickness to be used in applying the requirements for PWHT after it
has been determined that PWHT is required by UCS-56(a). These thicknesses are used to establish
holding time and temperature as given in Table UCS-56 and are applicable primarily where the vessel is
not postweld heat treated as a whole in one furnace charge, such as those items found in UCS-56(d)(1)
through UCS-56(d)(7).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. A-2
File: BC80-557
Question (1): On the tube-to-tubesheet welds shown in Fig. A-2, can the geometries (5), (6),(7), (8) and
(9) be categorized as, Joint Type a or e in Table A-2 if the dimension a is equal to or greater than 1.4t.
Reply (1): Yes. The intent of Fig. A-2 is to show some typical figures of a equal to or greater than
1.4t and less than 1.4t. The basic objective of the a 1.4t criteria is to define a tube-to-tubesheet weld
which is equal to the tube wall strength in tension.
Question (2): Is it acceptable to add the depth of fusion to the groove depth in Fig. A-2, geometries (2),
(3), and (4)?
Reply (2): No. It is the intent of Appendix A to base minimum fillet weld leg and groove weld depth
thickness dimensions on the actual component or machined weld bevel dimensions and not on estimated
weld fusion lines.
Question (3): If the geometry (4) of Fig. A-2 is used and the tube end metal is fused causing the
completed weld surface to fall below the tubesheet face, how should the dimension a be established?
Reply (3): Dimension a is to be established on the basis of adding the minimum tube-to-tubesheet
fillet weld leg dimension plus the depth of any groove welding. Therefore, the dimension a cannot be
measured from the tubesheet face, if the tube end projection and deposited weld metal are both below that
surface. See Fig. A-2, geometries (5) and (7).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 13, Rectangular Headers With Flanged and Bolted
Covers
File: BC81-280
Question (1): Are there any requirements in Division 1 for nozzle openings in short sided plates of
noncircular vessels?
Reply (1): It is intended that nozzle openings in the flat side plates of noncircular vessels shall
comply with the rules in UG-39, as applicable.
Question (2): Are there any rules in Division 1 for rectangular headers having flanged and bolted end
covers?
Reply (2): The present rules of Appendix 13 do not include rules for the design of noncircular
flanges, and as stated in 13-1(c), U-2(g) applies. For the noncircular, bolted flat cover, UG-34(c)(3)
applies.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AT-200(b)
File: BC81-313
Question: Under the provisions of AT-200(b), shall a Manufacturer who establishes a wide range of
possible times at PWHT subject the impact test plates to a heat treatment based on minimum or maximum
time at PWHT?
Reply: The impact test plates shall be heat treated based on the maximum time at PWHT
temperature (see also AT-112).
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, Minimum Impact Test Temperature
File: BC81-318
Question: In the use of material, eg., SA-203 Grade D, for Division 1 fabrication, do the provisions
in the Code govern the establishment of the minimum impact test temperature as opposed to those
referenced in the general material specification SA-20?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-320
Question: Is it permissible to attach a pipe to a vessel using a fillet weld deposited from the outside
only in lieu of using a threaded fitting as shown in Fig UW-16.2, sketch (k), if the attachment meets the
limitations specified in UW-16(g)(3)(a) and is not designed for lethal service?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UW-11(a)(2)
File: BC81-326
Question: Is there a conflict in the thickness requirement in UW-11(a)(2) and that of Table UCS-
57?
Reply: No. The thickness limitation of 1 1/2 in. in UW-11(a)(2) applies for any material unless
specifically limited by UCS-57 and other applicable provisions of Section VIII.
File: BC81-358
Question: Does the requirement in UG-12(b) for threaded portions of studs to be at least 1 1/2
diameters in length pertain to root diameters, or nominal diameters?
Reply: It pertains to nominal diameters.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UF-32(b)
File: BC81-363
Question: Under the requirements of UF-32(b), is it permissible to weld pads on a vessel made of
SA-372, Class IV material for the purpose of attaching mounting feet, supports, etc.?
Reply: No. The attachment of mounting feet, supports, etc., to a welded pad would constitute
major load carrying components, which are not permitted by the Code rules under welded fabrication.
Interpretation: VIII-81-89 Void-See 81-89R Vol. 12 Pg. 6 ]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Stamping of Plate Type Heat Exchangers
File: BC81-258
Question (1): If the gasket material is not listed in Table 2-5.1, or if different y and m values or
different thicknesses are used, may the completed vessel be stamped with the U symbol?
Reply(1) Yes. See Note (1) to Table 2-5.1. In such cases the requirements of U-2(g) shall apply.
Question (2): If the plates are made from a material not permitted by the rules, including applicable
Code Cases, but other parts such as end closures and tie bolts do satisfy the rules, may the completed
vessel be stamped with the U symbol?
Reply (2): No. However, the end closures could be constructed and marked as U symbol parts,
provided that all Code requirements, including design [see UG-120(c)], applicable to the part are
satisfied.
However, we caution you, that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction.
As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that may be
Question (3). If the end closures are hydrostatically tested in accordance with UC-99 without the plates,
and the completed assembly is not pressure tested, may the completed vessel be stamped with the U
symbol?
Reply (3): No. See UG-99(a).
File: BC81-262
Question: Are small openings that are exempt from opening reinforcement requirements by UG-
36(c)(3) also exempt from the attachment weld strength requirements of UG-41 and UW-15?
Reply: Yes, but they must satisfy other applicable requirements, such as those of UW-16.
Subject: Section VIII, Division, UW-52(b)(1)
File: BC81-264
Question: In applying the requirements of UW-52(b)(1) and (b)(2) for multiple duplicate vessels,
the following situation exists:
Circumferential and longitudinal butt welded seams are used in the construction of identical
pressure vessels. The circumferential and longitudinal butt welded seams are individually completed by
two different welders. Each vessel consists of 5 lineal feet of circumferential butt welds and 10 lineal feet
of longitudinal butt welds. One spot radiograph is taken of one of the circumferential butt welds and will
represent 10 vessels. For the same 10 vessels, there will be two spot radiographs taken of the longitudinal
welded seams, one in the first 50 lineal feet of welding and the second in the next 50 lineal feet of
welding. In summary, there will be three spot radiographs to represent 10 identical vessels. Will this
procedure satisfy the requirements of UW-52 for spot radiography?
Reply: Yes. In the production of identical pressure vessels, one radiograph can represent the
welder used for the circumferential butt welds and another radiograph can represent the welder used for
the longitudinal seams. If additional welders are used in either the circumferential welds or the
longitudinal welds, an additional radiograph would be necessary for each additional welder used.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, ISO (Metric) Bolting Standards for Pressure Retaining
Equipment
File: BC81-265
Question: May pressure retaining bolting according to the dimensions of the standards ISO/R262
and ISO/724 be used in the construction of boilers and pressure vessels, provided the materials, and heat
treatments when applicable, conform to an appropriate Section II material specification listed in Section I,
or Section VIII, Divisions 1 or 2?
Reply: Some bolt material specifications (see 15.1 of SA-193) have a provision for using threads
other than those specified in ANSI B1.1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Stamping of Vessels Containing Non-Code Components
File: BC81-307
Question (1): Is it permissible under Division 1 to apply the U part stamp and supply Partial Data
Report Forms for the metallic portions of a vessel that contains non-Code material, such as impervious
graphite?
Reply (1): Yes, provided that all Code requirements including design [see UG-120(c)] applicable to
the part are satisfied.
Question (2): Is it permissible under Division 1 to apply the U stamp and supply Manufacturer's Data
Report Forms for a metallic vessel which would completely enclose an impervious graphite vessel?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AF-223.2(c)(2) and Table AF-241.1
File: BC81-312
Question: Does the 6 in. diameter reference in AF-223.2(c)(2) and Table AF-241.1 apply to the
opening in the shell wall to accommodate a self-reinforcing forging, or to the inside diameter of the
forging?
Reply: The reference to the 6 in. diameter applies to the diameter of the finished opening in the
shell.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-23(a)
File: BC81-319
Question: Under the rules of Division 1, are there any provisions which would allow the increase of
the joint efficiency of welded austenitic steel pipe or tube without filler metal beyond that specified in
Table UHA-23 when Note (4) applies?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. 2-4 Sketch (8)
File: BC81-357
Question: Is the value of the minimum fillet weld throat dimension c in Fig. 2-4 sketch (8), affected
by nozzle neck thickness?
Reply: Yes. See definition of c
File: BC81-361
Question: Is it necessary to consider mill under tolerance of pipe used for nozzles in the calculation
of available nozzle reinforcement area of openings in UG-37 through UG-42?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII--81-98
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99(e)(1)
File: BC80-283
Question (1): If the chambers of a multichamber vessel are designed for independent operation may
one chamber, such as the tubes of a shell and tube heat exchanger, be subjected to an external pressure
test as would be applied during an internal pressure test of the other chamber in lieu of its own internal
pressure test?
Reply (1): No. See UG-99(e)(1).
Question (2): May the criteria used for the test in Question (1) be applied when the chambers have their
common elements designed for the maximum differential pressure that can occur?
Reply (2): No. See UG-99(e)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Hydraulic Expansion of Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints
File: BC80-529
Question (1): Is hydraulic expansion an acceptable procedure for expanding tube-to-tubesheet joints?
Reply(1): Yes, hydraulic expansion is an acceptable procedure under the scope of A-1(b)(1).
Question (2): Is it the intent of Appendix A to require the conducting of qualification tests in
accordance with A-3 and A-4 for hydraulically expanded joints?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Does the Committee have any experimental test results of technical papers which support
the need for qualification testing of hydraulically expanded tube-to-tubesheet joints?
Reply (3): No. This requirement is not intended to imply that hydraulic expansion is superior or
inferior to other methods, but simply reflects the state of the art and experience with the method at this
time.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UCS-79(d)
File: BC80-598
Question (1): In using the fiber elongation formula in UCS-79, should the fiber elongation be
multiplied by 100 to obtain percent value?
Reply (1): No. The formula gives percent values as is presently written.
Question (2): What value of R must be used in a pipe drawing operation?
Reply (2): The formula in UCS-79 is based on a forming rather than a drawing operation.
Accordingly, it cannot be used in calculating fiber elongations due to a drawing operation.
Question (3): Does a drawn pipe have to be stress relieved if none of the conditions in UCS-79(d)(1)
through UCS-79(d)(5) exist and the material is P-No. 1 with a maximum elongation of 40%?
Reply (3): The requirements of UCS-79(d) apply to forming rather than drawing operation. Stress
relieving due to drawing is considered in various material specifications (see 6 of SA-106, 7 of SA-179,
etc.).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Repair of Castings
File: BC81-184
Question: May porosity defects that are discovered during a pneumatic pressure test after all
manufacturing and brazing operations have been completed, in a part of a pressure vessel that is
manufactured from an SB-61 bronze casting, be sealed by vacuum impregnating with sodium silicate?
Reply: There are no specific provisions in Division 1 for the sealing of castings as described in
the Question. The requirements of the material specification that govern prohibit this practice.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56, UCS-57, and Appendix 2, Heat Treatment
Requirements
File: BC81-266
Question (1): Are radiography and PWHT per Division 1 required for a butt weld in the flange ring
when the flange thickness exceeds 1 1/4 in. for radiography or 1 1/2 in, for PWHT?
Reply (1): Yes. See UCS-56 and UCS-57 for detailed PWHT and radiography requirements,
Question(2): Does the answer to Question (1) change depending on whether the ring is formed from
plate or bar?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): When flange thickness exceeds 3 in., do the requirements of Part UCS or Appendix 2
apply?
Reply (3): Requirements of Appendix 2 apply in addition to all applicable portions of part UCS.
The requirements of 2-2 for a normalizing or full annealing heat treatment applies.
Question(4): For flanges fabricated under UG-11(c) by other than U Symbol holders are:
(a) radiography and PWHT required for butt welds in flanges over 1 1/4 in. or 1 1/2 in, thick,
respectively, when flanges are produced in accordance with an ANSI standard listed in UG-44?
(b) radiography and PWHT required for flanges over 1 1/4 in. or 1 1/2 in. thick, respectively,
produced to a Manufacturer's standard with welding in accordance with requirements of UW-26 through
UW--40?
Reply (4):
(a) The only standards listed in UG-44 covering flanges of P-No. 1 materials are ANSI B16.5-
1977 and API Standard 605-1978. Since these Standards do not permit flanges to be fabricated by
welding, flanges as described in the inquiry could not be included in a Code vessel under the provisions
of UG-11(c) and UG-44,
(b) Yes. See UG-11(c).
Question (5): Do the answers to Questions 4(a) and 4(b) above change depending on whether the flange
is formed from plate or bar?
Reply (5): No.
Question (6): If a parts Manufacturer is required to perform radiography and PWHT to meet Code
requirements, must he supply a Partial Data Report?
Reply (6): No, if the part is furnished under the provisions of UG-11(c). The use of Partial Data
Reports (U-2) and parts stamping also is acceptable under the Code.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Jacketed Vessel Design
File: BC81-305
Question (1): A jacket is to be installed on the outside surface of a metallic container which is not a
pressure vessel as defined in U-1. The surface of the container may be any shape including cylindrical,
spherical, or flat, and forms one pressure containing part of the jacket. The jacket is to operate at
pressures above 15 psi and may have geometries defined as follows:
(a) The jacket does not enclose the full perimeter of the container. In plan view it is a rectangle.
The outer wall of the jacket parallels the wall of the containers The jacket edge walls are formed by
welded bars or plates normal to the wall of the container.
(b) The jacket is as described in (a), except that it is an embossed or dimpled assembly as covered
by 14-10, and there are no separate edge walls. The container wall is the inner wall of the embossed or
dimpled assembly.
(c) The jacket consists of a half pipe, welded to the outside of the container, and may spiral about
its full perimeter one or more times.
(d) The jacket is circular in plan view, similar to Fig. 9-2, Type 3, and is welded to the container.
(e) The jacket and the container are cylindrical as shown in Fig. 9-2, Types 1, 2, 4, and 5. The
jacket encloses the entire circumference of the container.
For each of these cases, what dimensions should be used to determine if the jacket is excluded
from the Scope of the Code by the provisions of U-1(c)(9)?
Reply (1): Jackets as described above are not within the Scope of Division 1 if the inside dimensions
of the jacket do not exceed 6 in., as follows:
(a) the width, diagonal, or height in a cross section normal to the length of the jacket;
(b)as for (a), the dimensions apply to the assembly. The pitch between welds is not a factor,
(c) the inside diameter of the half pipe;
(d) the inside diameter of the jacket in plan view;
(e) the inside diameter of the jacket.
Question (2): If jackets as described above are within the Scope of the Code, may they be marked with
the UM symbol under the provisions of U-1(j)? Also, do the volume limits of U-1(j) apply to the volume
of the jacket alone?
Reply(2): Such jackets may be marked with the UM symbol. As stated in U-1(j), the volume limits
apply to each vessel (i.e., the jacket).
In the replies to both Questions, we caution you that the laws at the point of installation may
dictate the construction. As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1, such legal requirements must be reviewed to
determine requirements that maybe different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
File: BC81-397
Question (1): Can a Type 3 jacket welded to a reinforcement pad meet the requirements of 9-6(a), (b),
and (d)?
Reply (1): Yes. However, the additional loads that may be imposed shall be considered.
Question (2): Does a half pipe coil jacket have to be proof tested to UG-101 or can it be calculated?
Reply (2): Division 1 has no specific requirements for half pipe coil; therefore, the provisions of
U-2(g) shall apply.
File: BC81-400
Question: Are the formulas of UG-40(d)(1) for calculating metal in the vessel wall available for
reinforcement applicable to designs where the reinforcement extends into two areas with different
minimum required thicknesses?
Reply: No. However, the first sentence of UG-40(d)(1) states the requirements.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85(e)
File: BC81-431
Question (1): Is it the intent of UCS-85(e) to exempt materials conforming to one of the Specifications
listed in P-No. 1, Group Nos. 1 and 2, of QW-422, Section IX, from the requirements of UCS-85(b)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would the same exemption as referenced in Question (1) apply to other carbon and low
alloy steels which are not in the fully annealed condition but are quenched and tempered?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Is the requirement mentioned under Question (1) also valid for tubesheets with butt
welded hubs?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is it possible to do the tests on the specimens which have been subjected to simulated
PWHT at either the location of the vessel manufacturer or the manufacturer of the semifinished material?
Reply (4): Yes.
File: BC81-447
Question: Under the provisions of UCS-79(b), what constitutes a cold blow, and how is that
differentiated from a multiple press?
Reply: A cold blow is the result of an impact, such as a hammer strike, at ambient temperature.
This differs from a multiple press, which is a slow deformation without an impact.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 14-10.8(b)(2)
File: BC81-482
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of 14-10.8(b)(2) to substitute a peel test for
assemblies constructed to the requirements of 14-10.1(b)(3)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99 and Table W-3, Hydrostatic Test
File: BC81-489
Question: If a Manufacturer elects to hydrostatically test a Division 1 vessel above the minimum
test pressure required by UG-99(b), may the minimum hydrostatic test pressure be recorded on the Data
Report Form?
Reply: No, the specific test pressure at the top of the vessel in the test position is to be recorded.
See Note 37) of Table W-3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-34 and Table UCS-56
File: BC81-492
Question: Is it required under the provisions of UCL-34 and UCS-56 to postweld heat treat a vessel
made of SA-516 Grade 70 base material which is 1 5/16 in. thick, arid has l/4 in. thick integral nickel
clad-ding?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-493
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of UW-16(g)(3)(a) to allow fittings of 3 in. NPS or
less which are provided with the following end treatments: internal thread, external thread, socket weld,
and butt weld?
Reply: Yes, provided all of the limitations of UW-16(g)(3)(a) are met. See footnote 5, which
says explicitly that UW-16(g) is also applicable to fittings that are externally threaded, socket welded, or
butt welded.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16(d) and UW-16(g)(3)(a)
File: BC81-494
Question: Is it permissible under UW-16(g)(3) to consider inserted nozzle necks without added
reinforcement, as specified in UW-16(d), as butt weld fittings, and if they meet the criteria of UW-
16(g)(3)(a) and UW-16(g)(3)(b), may they be attached to vessels by a fillet weld deposited from only the
outside?
Reply: Yes. See footnote 5, which says that UW-16(g) is also applicable to fittings that are
externally threaded, socket welded, or butt welded.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Stainless Steel Bolts
File: BC81-444
Question: Is it permissible to use bronze nuts (SB-150, Alloy 642, 630, and 614) in conjunction
with stainless steel bolts (SA-193) in Division 1 construction?
Reply: Yes,
Interpretation: VIII-8I-114
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 1-5
File: BC81-458
Question: May a cone to cone intersection without a knuckle be designed to the same design rule as
presently outlined in 1-5 for a cone to cylinder intersection without a knuckle?
Reply: No.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2
File: BC81-467
Question(1): May hubless flanges as depicted in Fig. 2-4 be fabricated from plate?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May such flanges be fabricated from plate segments which are then butt welded provided
PWHT and radiographic requirements as outlined in the Code are met?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are there any specific diameter or pressure limitations other than those required by the
design rules in Division 1 for these fabricated hubless flanges?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-40, Nozzle Projection
File: BC81-471
Question: Under the requirements of UG-40, is there any limit on the amount of projection of a
nozzle inside a vessel wall that can be considered as contributing to the reinforcement required for a
nozzle opening, after proper deduction for corrosion allowance is made?
Reply: Yes, the limits of reinforcement given in UG-40(c) are equally applicable inward from
the inside vessel surface. The metal which may be considered is described in the second paragraph of
UG-40(d)(2). All excess area within these limits may be counted.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(i)
File: BC81-481
All the questions apply to parts for which marking and Partial Data Reports are required in
accordance with UG-116(i) and UG-120(c).
Question (1): Is it a requirement to mark a vessel part with the maximum allowable working pressure
and design temperature?
Reply (1): No. See UG-116(i).
Question (2): If a part is marked as required by UG-116(i), does this indicate that it was constructed in
accordance with the applicable rules?
Reply(2): Yes. The application of the U symbol by the part manufacturer is a symbolic
representation of the Certificate of Compliance required by the Partial Data Report Forms U-2 or U-2A.
Question (3): If the part is not marked with the maximum allowable working pressure and design
temperatures, how can these values be determined?
Reply (3): The responsibility lies with the vessel Manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Welded Stayed Construction in Nonrectangular Jacketed
Vessels
File: BC81-65
Question: A rectangular pressure vessel has a stayed jacket. For welded stays as shown in Fig.
UW-19.2, is it permissible to completely fill the hole with weld metal?
Reply: Yes. See UW-36.
Interpretation: VIII-82-0l
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 12-3(a)
File: BC81-210
Question (1): In applying the acceptance standards of Appendix 12, is a discontinuity rejectable if the
amplitude exceeds the reference level, but the length is less than that given in 12-3(a)?
Reply (1): No, provided the discontinuity is not interpreted to be a crack, lack of fusion, or
incomplete penetration. These classifications are rejectable regardless of length or amplitude.
Question (2): Is a discontinuity rejectable if the length is greater than that given in 12-3(a), but the
amplitude does not exceed the reference level?
Reply (2): No. See Reply (1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UNF-58(a) and (c), PT Requirements
File: BC81-236
Question: Do the requirements of UNF-58(c) relieve the requirements of UNF-58(a) for materials
conforming to SB-333 and SB-335?
Reply: No. The requirements of UNF-58(a) require PT examination for all welds on materials
conforming to SB-333 and SB-335.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-14(b)
File: BC81-252
Question (1): Is it permissible under the provisions of UW-14(b) to have an opening in a head to shell
weld when the opening meets the provisions of UG-36(c)(3) and the head to shell weld is examined for a
length equal to three times the diameter of the opening, using the radiographic requirements of UW-51?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For connections involved in Question (1), must calculations per UG-37 be performed to
indicate that added reinforcement is not required?
Reply (2): No.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-37 and UG-41, Nozzle Reinforcement limits
File: BC81-51 5
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, what area is available for reinforcement when the vertical
limit may include the dimension te?
Reply: After establishing the vertical reinforcing limit of the smaller of 2-1/2 times the nominal
shell thickness less corrosion allowance, or 2-1/2 times the nozzle wall thickness plus the added
reinforcement te and the horizontal reinforcing limit, any area over and above that required for shell wall
and nozzle wall minimum required thickness may be used for reinforcing area as long as it is within these
limits.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-35 and UCL-36, Examination of Base Metal With Weld
Overlay
File: BC81-586
Question: A heat exchanger is fabricated in the following manner: Stainless steel weld overlay that
is not included in the design calculation and is not air hardening is used. To comply with the density
limitation of Article 2 in Section V, the radiographic examination is performed after the weld overlay is
deposited. Prior to RT the weld overlay is examined by a dye penetrant check for cracks.
Is it permissible under the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 to consider as nonrelevant,
indications found by radiography in the weld overlay, not in the pressure retaining weld as assured by UT,
that are revealed to be rounded or elongated inclusions?
Reply: No. Any indications located as described in the Question shall be evaluated as prescribed
in Appendix 4.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-119, Nameplate Attachment
File: BC81-588
Question: Is it the intent of UG-119 to allow the attachment of the nameplate to a vessel skirt,
support bracket, or other nonpressure part, which is then welded to the shell of the vessel, as the sole
nameplate for the vessel?
Reply: No. The required nameplate bearing the markings of UG-116 shall be affixed directly to
the shell of the vessel. The provisions of UG-119(e) do allow the attachment of an additional nameplate
to skirts, supports, etc. with the provision that it be marked "duplicate."
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Sequence for NDT Examination on Welded Joints
File: BC81-594
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 mandate that any radiography or ultrasonic examination
that might be required by the Code be performed after the vessel is postweld heat treated, when such
PWHT is required?
Reply: No, except as specified in UHA-33(b) and (c) and UHT-57 for vessels constructed of
high alloy or heat treated steels.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, Appendix 13, 1980 Edition With Winter 1980 Addenda
File: BC80-723
Question (1): 13-5 introduces = angle. This value is required to calculate Mr, using 13-8(f)(2) Eq.
(38). In the example found in 13-16(e), a value of Mr is given, without showing the value of used. 13-
16(c) states "Stress maximum at = 27 deg." Is it the intent that the definition of = the angle at
which the maximum stress occurs in the corner sections? If this is the case, how is it calculated?
Reply (1): In the Winter 1980 Addenda, both 13-7(c) and 13-8(f) have had equations for = angle
at which Sb in the corner section is maximum) added. In 13-8(f), the determination of Mr from Eq. (38)
should use the equation for that follows Eq. (30)
Question (2): In 13-16(e), the statement is made that no radiographic examination is to be performed.
The membrane stresses are calculated with a joint efficiency factor E = 0.7. Later, in the bending stress
calculations, the factor E = 0.8 is used. The statement is also made that welds are located at A and F. F is
not shown on Fig. 13-2(a)(5). Although the location of F may have some bearing on the 0.8 value, it
appears that the maximum value of E would be 0.7 per Table UW-12, column (c). Please clarify the
location of F and the proper value.
Reply (2): F has been added in the Winter 1980 Addenda. It is the midpoint on the short side plate
following E, counterclockwise. The factor of 0.7 for tension on the side plates and for bending at the
weld joints A and F is determined directly from Table UW-12. The factor of 0.8 for bending stresses at
C, D, and E are determined from UW-12(c).
Question (3): 13-8(f)(2) Eq. (29) calculates the bending stress at F. C is not shown on Fig. 13-2(a)
sketch (5). Where is C?
Reply (3): C has been inadvertently omitted from the Winter 1980 Addenda. It is the point of
tangency between the long side plate and the rounded corner following B, counterclockwise.
Question (4): 13-4 establishes limits for stress values when designing for internal pressure. What stress
limits are intended for vessels of rectangular cross section when subjected to external pressure?
Reply (4): Appendix 13, Winter 1980 Addenda, does not include rules for external pressure design.
See U-2(g).
Question (5): When designing a jacketed vessel such that the vessel represented by Fig. 13-2(a), sketch
(3) is welded over the vessel represented by Fig. 13-2(a), sketch (5), as per Fig. UW-19.2, is it permissible
to take credit for the contributions of both the chamber plate and the jacket plate when calculating I11 and
I21,?
Reply (5): As noted in 13-1 and 13-2, the rules in Appendix 13 apply to vessels as illustrated in
Figs. 13-2(a), 13-2(b), and 13.2(c). All other configurations, including jacketed vessels, shall comply
with U-2(g) or UG-101.
Question (6): The constant K4 becomes a major factor in many of the equations of 13-8(f). The true
physical significance of K4 is not apparent. By varying the accuracy of the information used in this
calculation (number of decimal places or significant figures), a variation in the final value of K4 is
obtained. While this by itself may not be a problem, when K4 is used to find MA , widely differing
answers can be obtained. By carefully selecting values of K4, Eqs. (24), (25), (26), (27), (28), and (29)
can yield acceptable resulting stresses or, with a slightly different input, very unacceptable (high) stresses.
This allows the engineer a wide latitude in his choice of what may be acceptable and what is not
acceptable. Can this value of K4 be found in another way? Is there an easily understandable explanation
of K4's physical significance? What are the proper number of significant figures to use in such a
calculation?
Reply (6): The constant K4 has no physical significance. The form it has in the Code is the form it
took during the derivation of the equations. It is expected that each designer will develop good judgment
in the repeated use of Eq. (39) under Code rules.
Question (7): In the past, vessels as now covered in Appendix 13 were not justified by calculations, but
by proof test per U-2 and UG-101. Is it the intent of the Code that, now that satisfactory rules of design
are published, the proof test is not to be used for vessel configurations shown in Appendix 13?
Reply (7): Yes,
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UW-40(a)(5)
File: BC81-212
Question: May the requirements for a full circumferential band in performing postweld heat
treatment per UW-40(a)(5) be waived when a nozzle is welded into an insert reinforcing plate of greater
thickness than the rest of the shell, is attached for a nozzle-to-shell connection, and a heated zone of at
least 6 times the thickness around the weld attaching the nozzle is provided? Other welds in the part do
not require postweld heat treatment.
Reply: No. The requirements for an entire circumferential band shall apply, unless the nozzle to
insert weld is postweld heat treated prior to welding the insert into the shell.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-36
File: BC81-294
Question (1): For an integrally clad vessel, fabricated with SA-515 Gr. 60 and 410S stainless clad, and
welded with austenitic chromium nickel steel filler metal, is it mandatory under the provisions of UCL-36
to examine the base metal before the alloy cover weld is deposited and again after the alloy weld is
deposited, when spot radiography is the only consideration?
Reply (1): The provisions of UCL-36(b) require that spot radiography for crack detection be
performed after the alloy weld is made.
Question (2): If radiographic examination is performed once, i.e., after the joint including corrosion
resistant layer is complete, will it be acceptable?
Reply (2): Yes. See Reply (1), above.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AF-420, PWHT After Repair
File: BC81-432
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 2 require postweld heat treatment to be performed again on a
previously postweld heat treated vessel after the repair of a defect in P-No. 1 material, if the depth of the
repair weld does not exceed 1-1/4 in., or, if preheat is used. does not exceed 1-1/2 in?
Reply: No, unless a service restriction applies.
File: BC81-459
Question: Must the reverse side of a double weld joint always be prepared by chipping, grinding, or
melting out before applying weld metal from the reverse side?
Reply No [see UW-37(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 .
Interpretation: V111-82-13
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-22
File: BC81-519
Question: Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1 that, for those design analyses not
specifically covered for the loadings to be considered in UG-22, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be met?
Reply: Yes. Also see Footnote 1 of U-1.
Interpretation; VIII-82-14
Subject : Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Design Stress Criteria
File: BC81-276
Question: Is it permissible, for temperatures below the creep range, to establish allowable stresses
by using the numerical criteria factors from Appendix P of Section VIII, Division 1 in conjunction with
the tensile and yield strength values tabulated in Section III?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-34(a)
File: BC81-316
Question: Do the provisions of UCL-34(a) apply when the cladding thickness is not included in the
design thickness?
Reply Yes.
File: BC81-325
Question: Do the acceptance and rejection standards of Appendix 12 apply to porosity and rounded
type discontinuities?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC81-.597
Question: Is it permissible under UW-16(d) to attach an inserted neck into a shell in which a ring is
attached to the neck by a single full fillet lap joint, and to the shell with two partial penetration welds?
Reply: Yes for the ring to shell weld attachment, but no for the ring to neck weld attachment.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-4(d)
File: BC91-614
Question: May materials permitted by Section VIII, Division 1 be used for fabrication in sizes and
tolerances outside the limits established in the material specification and given in the allowable stress
tables of the Code?
Reply: Yes, if the provisions of UG-4(d) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 2-4(a)(3)
File: BC81-621
Question (1): Is there a limitation on pressure and temperature in fabricating optional type flanges as
depicted in Fig. 2-4 when they are designed as integral type?
Reply (1): No, except as limited for the appropriate material in the allowable stress tables of Section
VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): Shall the weld details be those as depicted in Fig. 2-4 sketches (8), (8a), (8b), and (9)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is it permissible for optional flanges as depicted in Fig. 2-4 to be fabricated from plate by
cutting the inside and outside diameter?
Reply (3): The provisions of 2-2(d)(2) establish the criteria for fabricating flanges from plate
material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-40(d)(2)
File: BC81-622
Question: Does UG-40(d) allow the value of E in the available area equations to be those of
columns (a) and (b) of Table UW-12 for a localized portion of a Category A weld joint that has been
penetrated by a nozzle, whereas the rest of the Category A joint is either spot or nonradiographed?
Reply: No. The provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 do not allow a welded joint to have two
different weld joint efficiencies.
File: BC81-646
Question: Is the definition of D in UG-81(a) the nominal inside diameter of the vessel shell?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AD-602
File: BC81-649
Question: Under the requirements of AD-602, may a schedule 40 pipe be used for a 4 in. inlet pipe
where the vessel shell has a minimum required thickness of 0.35 in., a corrosion allowance of 0.02 in.,
and a minimum required neck thickness due to pressure loading of 0.001 in.?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-52, Use of Run Off Tabs
File: BC81-655
Question: Does UW-52 allow the use of run off tabs to satisfy the spot X-ray provisions when the
tabs are of the same material and thickness as the two main butt welded pieces of material, and the
deposited butt weld is continuous using the same welding procedure?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-657
Question: Do the words "These stress values may be used without reduction" at the beginning of the
third sentence of UG-8(a) waive the requirements in UW-12(b) and UW-12(c)?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-699
Question: Is it required that an Authorized Inspector be present in the plant at all times during
which vessels and parts of vessels are fabricated under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2)?
Reply: No.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, Check Valves in Relief Systems
File: BC75-554
Question: Under what conditions may a check valve be installed between a Section VIII, Division 1
pressure vessel and its pressure relief device?
Reply: The rules of Division 1 do not prohibit installation of a check valve between a pressure
vessel and its pressure relief device. However, such an installation must meet all Code requirements,
including those of UG-135.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AG-301.1(a)
File: BC81-75
Question: Is it permissible under the provisions of AG-301.1(a) for the User's Design Specification
to specify fatigue data to be used in conducting a cyclic analysis, when the specified operating
temperatures exceed the 700 F limitation of Fig. 5-110.1, but do not exceed the maximum temperature
for which stresses are provided in Table ACS-1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Impact Test Requirements
File: BC81-667
Question: Are impact tests a requirement for the base metal, or deposited weld metal, or both, when
P-No. 1 Group 2 material is being welded to P-No. 1 Group 2 material and the design temperature is
0 F?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-10, 1980 Edition With Winter 1980 and Later Addenda
File: BC81-719
Question (1): SA-135 material is no longer referenced in Table UCS-23 but has been incorporated
into SA-53. May a vessel Manufacturer who has purchased SA-135 material use it as SA-53 material by
the provisions of UG-10?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Must the Data Report for vessels manufactured to the Winter 1980 Addenda, Or later,
state that SA-53 material was used, or may it reference SA-135?
Reply (2): The Data Report shall reference SA-53.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 1-5(e)
File: BC81-720
Question: In determining reinforcement requirements under 1-5 in Section VIII, Division 1 for a
cone to cylinder junction where the half apex angle is less than 30 deg., is it permissible to use the special
analysis requirements of 1-5(e) in place of the provisions in 1-5(b) and 1-5(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Procurement of SA-36 Material in Coil Form
File: BC81-722
Question: Is it permissible for a pressure vessel Manufacturer, to purchase SA-36 carbon steel in
coil form, decoil it at the Manufacturer's facility, and cut it to length as required for subsequent use in a
pressure vessel?
Reply: Yes,
File: BC82-20
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UW-11(a)(7) to substitute ultrasonic

examination for radiography when the radiograph cannot be taken with an acceptable penetrometer, or
when indications occur below the metal thickness as might be the case if slag becomes trapped under the
weld by a distorted backing ring?
Reply: No. The intent of UW-11(a)(7) is to permit such substitution for the closure seam of a
vessel only when it is not possible to obtain interpretable RT results because either the film or the
radioactive source cannot be properly located.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, U-2(g) and Table UHA-23, Design Thickness Calculation for
Tubesheets
File: BC82-22
Question (1): Note (1) to Table UHA-23 reads in part, "These stress values are not recommended for
flanges of gasketed joints, or other applications where slight amounts of distortion can cause leakage or
malfunction." Is it correct that there are no specific rules in Section VIII, Division 1 to be used to
determine the extent to which a tubesheet flange (heat exchanger construction) would be deformed?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May U-2(g) be used to cover this design situation in Question (1)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UCS-56(f)
File: BC82-54
Question: Does UCS-56(f) require that repaired welds be stress relieved when the original
weldments were not required to be stress relieved?
Reply: No, not unless required by UCS-56(d)(7).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix Z
File: BC82-62
Question (1): Under the requirements of Appendix Z, are there any restrictions on the diameter of the
vessel to which these design rules apply?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it permissible to weld the clamp lugs to the outside of the clamp ring halves?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are there any restrictions to the gap between the two clamp ring halves?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-5, Welding Procedures for Unidentified Material
Date Issued: Match 18, 1982
File: BC82-116
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that unidentified material used under the pro-
visions of UG-5 must be identified to the extent required to establish a P-Number for it in order that
compliance with the requirements of UW-28 can be verified?
Reply: No. The Manufacturer is responsible for using a qualified welding procedure in
accordance with Section IX. The Manufacturer must select the applicable welding procedure, giving
consideration to base metal characteristics, such as composition, weldability, and mechanical properties.
File: BC80-589
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, does UG-43(f) apply in the case of multiple
tubes expanded into headers of air cooled heat exchangers?
Reply: No.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix A
File: BC81-127
Question (1): Do the limits on the use of tubes as stays in A-1(d)(2) pertain to all types of heat
exchangers (e.g., fixed tubesheet, fixed tubesheet with expansion joint, floating head)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If an expanded tube to tubesheet joint is acceptable for staying per A-1(d)(2),how may
the design stay load be calculated?
Reply (2): Use A-2, Eq. (2).

Question (3): Do the requirements of UG-34 apply to the extension of a fixed tubesheet that is provided
for bolting to heads?
Reply (3): No. The requirements of Appendix 2 and the intent of U-2(g) are to account for bolting,
edge moment and other loadings.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, 4-138
File: BC81-368
Question (1): Is it the intent of 4-138 that the stress intensities identified as "General membrane" and
"Bending across nozzle section" in Table 4-120.1 occurring in a nozzle neck within, but not beyond, the
area of reinforcement be classified Pm., primary general membrane stress, without regard to the nature or
source of the external loading?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it the intent of 4-138 that, in a nozzle neck beyond the limits of reinforcement, a
primary local membrane stress classification PL (4-132) be applied to the stress intensities resulting from
external force or moment without regard for the condition that the load may be self-limiting as defined in
4-112(h), as for thermal expansion and contraction of external piping?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 2 that, in the head or shell adjacent to a nozzle
with external forces or moments, stress intensities are classified and combined according to Figs. 4-120.1
and 4-130.1, and that the special requirement of 4-138 does not apply at this location?
Reply (3); Yes.
File: BC81-524
Question: Is it permissible to use ASTM A 621 under Code Case 1292 and Code Case 1376 for
dimpled embossed assemblies if the material is proven to meet the requirement of SA-414, which is listed
in Subsection C of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: It is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1 that material for Code use be ordered,
produced, and documented to an SA Specification; however, material produced to some other
specification could qualify as an SA material provided the Inspector is presented with evidence acceptable
to him, including the specific requirements of UG-10, indicating that the material satisfies all the
requirements of the Code approved Specification.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fabrication of a Completed Vessel With Application of Code
Symbol Stamp
File: BC81-589
Question: A paper machine roll is manufactured to the Code and, under the required hydrostatic
test, a leak is disclosed in one of the bolted heads. A long lead time is encountered in obtaining a
replacement head. The roll can be installed and used without internal pressure as an idler roll until a new
head is available. Can Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to the installation of the head at a future date
and, after the required hydrostatic test, permit the stamping of the vessel and the completion of the U-1
Manufacturer's Data Report Form? The test and the application of the U-1 Stamp would be controlled by
the “U” Stamp holder, and the test would be witnessed by an Authorized Inspector.
Reply: No. The ASME Code Stamp is applicable to new construction only. Parts, or material, or
both, from equipment that has been placed in service cannot be salvaged for use in a vessel constructed to
Section VIII, Division 1.
File: BC81-598
Question (1): Which paragraphs in Part UW apply to the attachment weld connections of the stay plates
of noncircular vessels designed in accordance with Appendix 13?
Reply (1): The weld attachment details of stay plates shall be in accordance with UW-19 as
applicable. Weld details not covered by UW-19 shall comply with the requirements of U-2(g).
Question (2): Is it necessary for multiple nozzle openings in noncircular vessels designed in accordance
with Appendix 13 to be reinforced in accordance with the rules of UG-42, as applicable?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): For noncircular vessels designed and constructed in accordance with Appendix 13, is the
ligament efficiency applied to stay plates with rows of holes?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): For noncircular vessels designed and constructed in accordance with Appendix 13, do the
rules of 13-9(f) apply if the thicknesses of opposite side plates are not equal?
Reply (4): No. In this case, 13-1(c) shall apply.
Question (5): In noncircular vessels with rounded plate sections as shown in Fig. 13-2(a) sketches (3)
and (5), Fig. 13-2(b), and Fig. 13-2(c), are the calculated stresses based on the nominal plate thickness
before forming?
Reply (5): No. The stress formulas in Appendix 13 are used to determine the minimum required
thicknesses [as defined in 3-1(h)] of the completed vessel sections.
File: BC82-5
Question: Is it required when performing a proof test under the provisions of UG-101 to perform an
additional proof test when the material specification grade, class, or type is changed? An example of such
a change might be from SA-240, Type 304 to Type 316 or 315L.
Reply: Yes [see UG-101(d)] .
File: BC82-53
Question: UW-15(c) requires telltale holes in nozzle reinforcement plates and saddles of nozzles.
Are telltale holes required in reinforcement plates for nonpressure parts, such as lifting lugs, saddles, legs,
and such attachments, under the following conditions:
(a) when plates extend over vessel weld seams and are continuously welded all around;
(b) when plates do not extend over vessel weld seams but are continuously welded all around?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-82-45 Void-See Vol. 14, Pg. 87 N0. 82-45]

File: BC81-38
Question: (1) For a pressure vessel designed for low temperature service (50 F) and internal pressure
only that is horizontally supported on a number of ring girders directly attached to the vessel by welding
and that utilizes backing strips, left in place, in the welding of the head to shell joints, must the ring
girders and backing strips meet the requirements of UCS-66(b) for low temperature service?
Reply (1): Ring girders directly attached to the vessel by welding and backing strips left in place as
described in Question (1) are considered to be material used in the construction of the vessel. Therefore,
they are subject to the provisions of UCS-66(b).
Question (2): In the vessel described in question (1), may SA-36 material be used for ring girders and
backing strips?
Reply (2): No. See UCS-6 and UCS-66.
ATTENTION
The foregoing Interpretation has been further considered and the following corrected Question (1) sent to
the inquirer..
Correction Issued: September 30, 1982
Question (1): For a pressure vessel designed for low temperature service (50 F) and internal pressure
and that utilizes backing strips, left in place, in the welding of the head to shell joints, must the ring
girders and backings strips meet the requirements of UCS-66(b) for low temperature service?
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. 11-2
File: BC79-713
Question: Under what conditions does Fig. 11-2 apply?
Reply: Figure 11-2 applies to saturated water, i.e., water at a temperature at or just below the
saturation temperature.
File: BC80-429
Question (1): If the Manufacturer satisfies his Authorized Inspector that sample measurements (less
than 100% of lots of materials such as multiple sheets sheared from the same coil, or multiple heads
formed on the same die set) establish that thicknesses of materials or shapes of formed parts, or both,
meet all specified or applicable Code requirements, have the specific requirements of UG-90(b)(6)
Section VIII, Division 1 with respect to thickness, and UG-90(b)(9) and UG-96 with respect to formed
shape been met?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the Manufacturer satisfies his Authorized Inspector that examinations of materials for
the detection of unacceptable defects are made during fabrication at a time or stage when they are
meaningful, instead of "before fabrication," have the requirements of UG-90(b)(6) and UG-93(d) with
regard to "before fabrication" been met?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 14-10, MAWP of Embossed Assemblies
File: BC80-764
Question: For dimpled or embossed assemblies constructed under the rules of 14-10, where the
MAWP has been established by the proof test method described in 14-10.5(a), is it permissible to increase
the thickness of any part of the assembly and retain the same MAWP established prior to the thickness
increase?
Reply: No.
Interpretation VIII-82-49
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, U-1A Data Reports
File: BC81-95
Question: A Section VIII, Division 1 vertical pressure vessel is supported by a cylindrical skirt
welded to its bottom head. Four clips at the base attach the skirt to the foundation. There are no
attachments for superimposed equipment. Would Item 12 of Manufacturer's Data Report Form U-1A be
satisfactorily completed as shown below?
12. Supports: Skirt Yes Lugs No Legs No Other N/A Attached: Welded to head
Reply: Yes.
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1, UG-47 and Fig. UG-47 sketch (a)
File: BC81-150
Question: Are the rules of UG-47 through UG-50 applicable to a floating end closure, where the
stays are not threaded into the closure, but only pass through a drilled hole and are held and sealed by
gaskets, washers, and nuts external to the closure?
Reply: The rules of UG-47 through UG-50 apply equally to both fixed and floating types of end
closures.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, PWHT of Test Coupons
File: BC81-465
,
Question: Is it a requirement under UG-84(d),UCS-85(e),& AM-204.4 and AT-114.2 to subject the

test of specimens P-No. 1 Gr. 1 or 2 materials to simulated postweld heat treatment prior to impact test?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Coincidence of Tray Supporting Rings With Circumferential
Welds
File: BC81-585
Question: Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1 for internals, such as tray supports
attached by continuous double fillet welds, to straddle and seal off vessel welds?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-79(d)
File: BC81-623
Question: What amount of extreme fiber elongation is permitted without postform heat treatment
under the requirements of UCS-79(d), where shells or heads are formed at temperatures less than 250 F,
and the conditions of UCS-79(d)(1) through (4) are not applicable?
Reply: For all carbon and low alloy steels, the maximum extreme fiber elongation is limited to
5%, regardless of other considerations. For P-No. 1, Groups Nos. 1 and 2, the maximum extreme fiber
elongation may be 40%, provided UCS-79(d) is met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-51(b)(5)
File: BC81-659
Question: Under the requirements of UHA-5l(b)(5), are vessel production impact tests of welds
required for Type 304 materials welded by the SMAW process using Type 308L electrodes with a
nominal nickel content of 13% for operating temperatures of -325 F and above, if requirements of UG-
84(h) have been met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, AF-810.20(b)(4)
File: BC81-687
Question: The last sentence of AF-810.20(b)(4) seems to contradict the requirements of AF-
810.20(b)(1), (2), and(3). Should AF-810.20(b)(4) be deleted?
Reply: No. AF-810.20(b)(4) relates to layers not welded to the previous surface, whereas AF-
810.20(b)(1), (2), and (3) relate to layers that are welded to the previous surface.
File: BC81-578
Question: Under the rules of UG-16, would tubes in a shell and tube heat exchanger that are below
6 in. in nominal diameter be required to meet the 1/16 in. minimum thickness requirement, whether or not
the shell is Code Symbol stamped?
Reply: No.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UG-99, External Pressure Testing
File: BC81-718
Question (1): What are the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 for pressure testing of single
chamber pressure vessels designed for external pressure above 15 psi? The requirements of UG-99(b)
and (f) do not appear to apply.
Reply (1): Section VIII, Division 1 does not contain specific rules for pressure testing of a pressure
vessel as described in the inquiry. The requirements of U-2(g) would apply.
Question (2): For combination units, what rules apply to external pressure testing of the inner shells of
jacketed vessels and the tubes of shell and tube heat exchangers tested under the provisions of UG-99(b)
and UG-99(c)?
Reply (2): Except as covered in UG-99(f), there are no specific rules for external pressure testing.
However, tests in accordance with UG-99(e) are required. In the test of such vessels, the tubes or inner
shell is subjected to an external pressure established by the internal design pressure and temperature. In
some cases, particularly where the temperature correction ratio of UG-99(b) is relatively high, damage to
the tubes or inner shell might result. Manufacturers should consider this condition in design to guard
against the possibility of such damage. It should be considered whether or not the vessel described in
Question (1) comes under the scope of PVHO-1.
File: BC82-25
Question: Does the requirement in UHA-34 for the 36% nickel steel welds pertain to specific
material specifications on 36% nickel steels, or does it pertain to all material specifications with a 36%
nickel content as a minimum?
Reply: The requirement in UHA-34 applies to specific material specifications for 36% nickel
steels nominal composition (e.g., see Table UHA-23 under SA-658).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 2, Appendix 5, Design Fatigue Curves
File: BC82-28
Question (1): Do the fatigue curves of Appendix 5 consider the effect of prestressing for multilayer
vessels?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): How may the fatigue curves be modified for multilayer vessels?
Reply (2): The fatigue curves of the Code may not be modified by users of the Code.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UW-11 and UW-12, Category D Welds
File: BC82-64
Question: By the rules of Section III-Division 1, is any radiography required for a Category D
corner joint for a vessel built according to UW-12(a) and Table UW-12, Column (a)?
Reply: No, except for vessels constructed under Part UHT.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UB-31(a) and UW-28(b)
File: BC82-69
Question: UW-28(b) and UB-31(a) require welding and brazing procedures to be qualified in
accordance with the requirements of Section IX. Does Section VIII Division 1 contain any special
requirements concerning the completion of procedure Qualification Records as required by Section IX?
Reply: No.
File: BC82-71
Question (1): What is the intent of the word “confirmed” in UW-51(b)?
Reply (1): The intent of the word "confirmed" is that if a Manufacturer elects to use ultrasonic
examination, he must UT the unacceptable imperfection before repairs are made so as to identify the
imperfection's size, shape, and location. After repair, the Manufacturer can then verify by UT that the
imperfection was removed
Question (2): Can unacceptable imperfections revealed by radiography and confirmed by ultrasonic
examination be considered acceptable if the UT responses fall below the 20% reference level specified in
12-3 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No. UT is only permitted to verify that the unacceptable imperfections revealed by
radiography are removed.
Question (3): In using the ultrasonic examination option of UW-51(b), is it necessary to radiograph the
final acceptable repair?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Tables NF-1 and UF-27, and Appendix 5
File: BC82-96
Question: Why are the values for the moduli of elasticity in Tables UF-27 and NF-1, and Appendix
5 of Section VIII, Division 1 different for the same material?
Reply: The moduli of elasticity shown in Tables UG-27 and NF-1 are based on average values at
room temperature as published in the literature. The values listed in the External Pressure Charts are
based on actual data of specific tests supplied to ASME and are intended for external pressure
calculations only.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-56(c) and (d), and UG-43(e)
File: BC82-124
Question (1): Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-43(e) to allow a threaded connection with
a size below that specified in Table UG-43 (e.g., 3/8 in.)?
Reply (1): The rules in Section VIII, Division 1 do not prohibit the use of threaded connections less
than 1/2 in. pipe size. Requirements, such as thread engagement and minimum plate thickness, should be
specified by the individual responsible for the particular application.
Question (2): Is postweld heat treatment under UCS-56 required when a ring flange made of P-No. 1
material of any thickness is welded as illustrated in Fig. 2-4, flange type 7, to a nozzle neck of P-No. 8
material?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-16.1, Sketch (b)
File: BC82-126
Question (1): Is the weld detail shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (b) a butt weld?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, is volumetric examination required for Category
D welds in lethal service?
Reply (2): No, unless nozzle designs of the types shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketches (f-1) through (f-
4) are incorporated into the design (see UW-11).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 1-6(g)(2) and 2-6
File: BC82-207
Question: In the design of a floating head cover flange for a spherically dished steel plate cover of
the type shown in Fig. 1-6, sketch (d) in Section VIII, Division 1, is it permissible to set the factor F in
the formula under 1-6(g)(2) to zero when the flange is designed with the moment for gasket seating as
shown in Formula (5) for 2-6?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-79-13R
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-99(b) and UG-99(d)
File: BC78-847*, BC81-433*
Question (1): Is it the intent of UG-99(b) that the highest ratio of stress values should be used provided
that no other part of the vessel would be subjected to a stress exceeding 90% of the material yield
strength?
Reply (1): The requirements of UG-99(b) call for the minimum hydrostatic test pressure to be 1 1/2
MAWP multiplied by the lowest ratio of stress values.
The requirements of UG-99(d), however, do say that Section VIII, Division 1, does not specify an upper
limit for hydrostatic test pressure.
Question (2): Concerning the "lowest ratio of stress values" of UG-99(b), may the lowest ratio be
applied even for vessels for which the ratios of stress values are significantly different as could result
from using different materials or different design temperatures for various parts?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Assume that the ratios of stress values are significantly different as described in Question
(2) and that it is desired to test to 1( times the MAWP multiplied by the highest ratio of stress values
permitted by UG-99(d). Should the manufacturer consider the need to increase the thickness of parts
having lower ratios of stress values?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Code Stamping of Plate-Type Heat Exchangers
File: BC81-258*
Question (1): If the gasket material is not listed in Table 2-5.1, or if different y and m values or
different thicknesses are used, may the completed vessel be stamped with the U symbol?,
Reply (1): Yes. See Note (1) to Table 2-5. 1.
Question (2): If the plates are made from a material not permitted by the rules, including applicable
Code Cases, but other parts such as end closures and tie bolts do satisfy the rules, may the completed
vessel be stamped with the U symbol?
Reply (2): No. However, the end closures could be constructed and marked as U symbol parts,
provided that all Code requirements, including design [see UG-120(c)], applicable to the part are
satisfied.
However, we caution you that the laws at the point of installation may dictate the construction. As
indicated by footnote 1 to U-1, such laws must be reviewed to determine requirements that may be
Question (3): If the end closures are hydrostatically tested in accordance with UC-99 without the plates,
and the completed assembly is not pressure tested, may the completed vessel be stamped with the U
symbol?
Reply (3): No. See UG-99(a).
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-01
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11(b) and UG-93(a)(1), Identification and Marking for
Heads
File: BC81-195
Question (1): What identification in accordance with UG-93 is required?
Reply (1): A material test report or certificate of compliance shall be furnished as required by UG-
93(a)(1).
Question (2): Does marking on the head as required by UG-11(b) satisfy all the applicable marking
requirements?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12 and Table UW-12
File: BC81-213
Question: Is there a stress reduction factor in the thickness calculation for a seamless ellipsoidal
and/or torispherical head attached to a shell by a bolted flange, and the head-to-flange and flange-to-shell
joints are category C corner joints which satisfy the requirements of UW-13, the longitudinal seam in the
shell is spot X-rayed, and the vessel meets the requirements of UW-52?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-I(e) and UG-43(f)
File: BC81-260
Question: In the construction of an air-cooled heat exchanger consisting of two box headers with
connecting fin tubes, may each of the two box headers be considered a separate pressure vessel with the
boundary limited at the tube-to-tubesheet connection, per UG-43(f)?
Reply: No. The rectangular headers could not be considered independent pressure vessels. See
U-I(e).
If for some reason, such as the use of tube materials not approved for Section VIII-1 use, it was
desired to exclude the tubes from the vessel, the box headers could be constructed and marked as "U"
parts, provided that all Code requirements, including design [see UG-120(c)], applicable to the part are
satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-100(a), Conditions to Permit Pneumatic Test
File: BC81-526
Question: To what extent can the limitations and restrictions of UG-100(a) be relaxed if the
manufacturer can demonstrate alternate methods of pneumatic testing which provide a degree of safety at
least as high as hydrostatic testing?
Reply: In recent years, the Committee has considered similar questions on several occasions and
has not relaxed the requirements that you question.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1, UG-45(c)
File: BC81-651
Question: What is the definition of the words "vessel material" as used in UG-45(c)?
Reply: The words "vessel material" refer to the head or shell and the nozzle neck material. For
an opening in a head, the 70% is applied to the lower of the tensile stress allowable of the head or nozzle
neck; for an opening in a shell, it is applied to the lower of the tensile stress allowable of the shell or
nozzle neck material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-10(a), Use of SA-515 Material
File: BC81-660
Question: It is known that a plate exceeding a 2 in. thickness has not been normalized as required
by SA-515. If this plate satisfies the mechanical and chemical test requirements for SA-515 as required
by UG-10, may it be used in Section VIII, Division 1, construction as SA-515 plate?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-07 (VOID SEE 1-83-07R PAGE 189)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12(c)
Date Issued: July 26 1982
File: BC81-664
Question: For vessels built under UW--12(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, that have no welds
capable of being radiographed, is it permissible to use the full allowable stress value prescribed for the
materials in Subsection C when determining nozzle reinforcement calculations?
Reply: No. [See UG-37(b)(4).]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-35(b)
File: BC82-66
Question: Is it the intent of the first sentence of UG-35(b) to require redundancy of locking
mechanisms for quick-opening closures or only of each element in a lock mechanism?
Reply: The first sentence of UG-35(b) requires that a locking mechanism be so designed that a
failure of any one of its parts will not allow the closure to open while the vessel is under internal pressure.
This may require redundancy of some of the parts.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHA-51(b)(5)(a)(1)
File: BC82-127
Question: UHA-51(a) exempts impact testing for Type 304L stainless steel for vessels operating at
temperatures of -425°F and higher. UHA-51(b)(5)(a)(1) exempts vessel (production) impact tests of
welds for Type 304 stainless steel provided that deposited weld metal is of less than 0.10% carbon and is
Type 308, 308L, 309, or 316L. Are vessel (production) impact tests of welds for Type 304L also
exempted provided they meet the same carbon and Type requirements?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2, UW-3, and Appendix A, Requirements for Tube-to-
Tubesheet joints in Lethal Services
File: BC82-164
The questions apply to welded tube-to-tubesheet joints where one or both sides of a heat
exchanger are in lethal service as defined in UW-2(a) and are as follows:
Question (1): Do such joints fall under any of the joint categories of UW-3?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is radiographic examination required?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Other than visual, is any nondestructive examination required?
Reply (3): Not unless the requirements of UHA-34 or UHT-57 are applicable.
Question (4): For welding processes permitted by UW-27, are there any special requirements
concerning the use or absence of filler metal?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Are welded or seal welded joints required?
Reply (5): No.

Question (6): Must the provisions of Nonmandatory Appendix A concerning tube-to-tubesheet joints be
satisfied?
Reply (6): No, but they are acceptable where applicable. The details of the joint are the
responsibility of the vessel manufacturer, after consideration of the service information furnished to him
by the user. See UW-2(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-33(a) and Table UW-12
File: BC82-165
Question(1): In Section VIII, Division 1, construction, for a formed head with pressure on the convex
side, is it mandatory to select the greater of the thicknesses as calculated according to UG-33(a)(1) or (2)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In Section VIII, Division 1, construction, for a shell and head attached by a single, full
fillet lap joint without plug welds for attaching shells and heads not over 5/8 in. thick, how is the joint
efficiency of 0.45 from Table UW-12, column (c), applied?
Reply (2): For calculating the circumferential stress in the seamless shell, UG-27(c)(1) is used with
E = 1.0, but with stress used in the formula equal to 80% of the allowable stress from the tables.
For calculating the longitudinal stress in the seamless shell, UG-27(c)(2) is used with E = 0.45,
but with the stress used in the formula equal to the allowable stress from the tables.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79(d)
File: BC82-170
Question: Do P-No. 1 materials require heat treatment after forming when the extreme fiber
elongation exceeds 40% and none of the conditions (1) through (5) of UCS-79(d) apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure UW-16.1, UHT-18(a), UHT-56(d), Table UHT-56,
UHT-79(a)(1) and (2), and Table UHT-23
File: BC82-180
Question (1): Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, that postweld heat treatment requirements of
UHT-56(d) would be met when any of the alternatives given in UW-40 are followed?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Where postweld heat treatment is required under UHT-56(d), UHT-79(a)(1) and (2), and
Table UHA-56, must it also include the normalizing/quenching heat treatment?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Are screwed connections of the type shown in sketch (y-1) or (z-1) of Fig. UW-16.1
permitted to be attached to shell plate of 2 in. thickness or less, for all plate materials of Table UHT-23?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-36(b)(2)
File: BC82-191
Question: What is the intent of UG-36(b)(2) in recommending that openings exceeding one-half the
shell diameter be made by a reversed curve section, when that opening is in the head?
Reply: The reverse curve approach is recommended due to the stress condition being an
improved one using reverse curves; this, however, does not imply that a conventional nozzle, properly
designed, could not be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; 13-14(e)
File: BC82-206
Question: In 13-4(e), what C-factor shall be used and what is the intent of the phrase "no less than"?
Reply: The C-factor to be used is C = 0.20 and the phrase "no less than" refers to the fact that
details which permit a C-factor of less than C=0.2 in UG-34 are not permitted for noncircular vessels.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure UG-37
File: BC82-223
Question: Does the "plane" in Fig. UG-37 refer to different planes of the opening in the shell
relative to the angle of the plane with the longitudinal axis of the shell?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-120, Data Report Forms
File: BC82-238
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, allow the creation of Data Report Forms by the
Manufacturer using any printed form as long as the size, arrangement, and content are identical, without
addition or deletion, to either the forms available from ASME, samples of which are shown in Appendix
W, or the corresponding forms available from The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Inspectors?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHA-32(e) and UHA-51(c)
File: BC82-242
Question (1): Under the provisions of UHA-51(c), is a production weld test specimen required on a
joint of Type 316 to 316 stainless with 316 electrode when joint is heat treated below 1650°F after
welding?
Reply(1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it correct that under UHA-32(e), postweld heat treatment if required shall be in
accordance with UCS-56(e) except as modified by the Notes to Table UHA-23?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC82-258
Question: Do the provisions of UG-77(a) apply to a miscellaneous forged threaded flange meeting
UG-11(a)(1) when an attached fillet weld covers the identification markings?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix A, PWHT of Tube-to-Tubesheet joints
File: BC82-259
Question(1): In the case of tube-to-tubesheet joints separating a shell side pressure chamber from a
tube side pressure chamber, both at the same design and operating pressure, do the heat treatment
requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, apply?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does the requirement in A-1(c) that "Appropriate ... heat treatment shall be used differ
from the requirements in UCS-56(c) for heat treatment of dissimilar materials?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure 2-4
File: BC82-274
Question: Figure UA-48, sketch (3) of the Winter 1977 Addenda to Section VIII, Division 1,
showed by a dotted line that loose-type hubbed and hubless flanges can be attached with two fillet welds
only. This dotted line, however, has been removed in subsequent issues of the Code. In the 1980 Code
Edition, hubless loose-type flanges attached by welds are only shown under optional type flanges, Fig. 2-
4, sketches (8), (8a), (8b), and (9). Does this mean that all hubless loose-type flanges must be attached
according to Fig. 2-4, sketches (8), (8a), (8b), or (9), even if the flange stresses have been determined for
loose-type flanges per 2-7(b)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(b)
File: BC82-289
Question: If a nozzle exceeding the size limitations of UW-11(b) contains a Category B butt weld,
and the welder or welding operator makes this weld as well as the Category A butt welds in the vessel,
which are examined under UW-52(b), does UW-11(b) require an additional spot examination to be taken
of each Category B nozzle weld?
Reply: No, providing the linear length of welding by the welder or welding operator does not
exceed 50 ft.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix W, Forms U-1 and U-4
File: BC82-291
Question: The format of Form U-1 in Appendix W of Section VIII, Division 1, has no designated
spaces for bolted type exchanger body flanges; is it necessary to record these flanges either under
Remarks or on the Supplementary Form U-4?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Use of SA-105 Material
File: BC82-295
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, allow the use of SA-105 material for fabrications other
than piping flanges?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, 2-4(a)(3)
File: BC82-301
Question: Is it permissible under Appendix 2 to fabricate an integral-type flange by using Fig. 2-4,
sketches (8), (8a), (8b) and (9c), when the provisions of 2-4(a)(3) are exceeded?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UHA-23, Use of SA-240 Grade TP304L
File: BC82-311
Question: Is it permissible to use SA-240 Type 304L material with the higher allowable stresses as
specified in Table UHA-23 of Section VIII, Division 1, for fabricated heads and/or shells designed for
internal pressure?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-125(h), UG-135(e), UG-136(a)(3), and M-5(b), Relief
Protection for External Source of Pressure
File: BC80-198
Question (1): One compartment of a Section VIII, Division 1, heat exchanger contains water which is
being heated and has a pressure relief valve to protect against overpressure due to thermal expansion of
the water if this compartment was blocked in while hot fluid was in the other compartment. Under relief
conditions, the temperature of the water could exceed 140°F. Do any of these conditions waive the
requirements of UG-136(a)(3) for a lifting device on the pressure relief valve?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In a system containing Section VIII, Division 1, pressure vessels, a vessel "A" supplies
fluid under pressure to one or more vessels "B" with intervening block valves. Vessel A has relief
devices which satisfy Code requirements, and its maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) is not
greater than the MAWP for the B vessels. There is no other source of pressure such as that from fire to
the B vessels. Do the B vessels require relief devices other than those provided for vessel A?
Reply (2): No. See UG-1 25(h), UG-1 35(e), and M-5(b).
Interpretation VIII-1-83-28
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-134(d), UG-135(g), and Appendix M, Back Pressure on
Relief Devices
File: BC80-607
Question (1): UG-134(d) states "The pressure at which any device is set to operate shall include the
effect of static head and constant back pressure." Where relief devices are piped into a relief system, the
back pressure can vary. Does "constant back pressure" mean the back pressure, if any, normally
maintained in the relief system when no devices have opened?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the back pressure varies above the constant back pressure, the pressure in the vessel
could exceed the maximum allowable working pressure. Is this acceptable providing that the
requirements of UG-135(g) are satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): UG-135(g) makes reference to Appendix M and states in part "The size, of the discharge
lines shall be such that any pressure that may exist or develop will not reduce the relieving capacity of the
relieving devices below that required to protect the vessel." M-7(b) and M-8 make recommendations on
the design of relief systems and on the consideration of relief devices suitable for high or variable back
pressures. Do these provisions require that the relief devices and relief system prevent the pressure in the
vessel(s) from exceeding the limits of UG-125?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-125, Relief Devices
File: BC81-268
Question (1): UG-125(h) states "The protective devices required in (a) need not be installed directly on
a pressure vessel when the source of pressure is external to the vessel and is under such positive control
that the pressure in the vessel cannot exceed the maximum allowable working pressure at operating
temperature except as permitted in (c) (See UC-98)." A note states that control instruments, except for
pilot operated valves, cannot be considered for such positive control. What constitutes "positive control"
as used in UG-125(h)?
Reply (1): Without excluding other possible methods of positive control, it is often taken to mean
the maximum pressure that could be developed in a vessel based upon engineering calculations applicable
to the system. One example might be the maximum shut-off head plus maximum suction pressure of a
pump which pressurized the vessel. Another example might be the pressure drop at maximum flow
conditions when a vessel discharges through a system to a known pressure, such as the atmosphere.
Question (2): If a vessel is pressurized by a centrifugal pump and the maximum allowable working
pressure of the vessel exceeds the shut-off head of the pump plus its maximum suction pressure, must the
vessel still be protected by a relief device(s)?
Reply (2): Yes, see UG-125(a). However, this source of pressure need not be considered in
determining the required capacity of the relief device(s).
Question (3): If the reply to Question (2) is yes, then under what formula or guidelines does one
determine the required capacity of the relief device?
Reply (3): Except for unfired steam boilers as covered by UG-125(b) and for the references
contained in M-11 concerning fire conditions, the Code does not provide requirements or guidance on the
determination of required relief capacities. That is the responsibility of the user or his designated agent.
Question (4): If the answer to Question (2) is yes, is it still acceptable to have the set pressure of the
relief device at the maximum allowable working pressure of the vessel which exceeds the maximum
pressure the pump can develop?
Reply (4): Yes.
Question (5): If the answer to Question (2) is yes, has the Committee considered modification of the
requirements of UG-125(a), which requires all vessels to be protected by relief devices?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-2(a) and UW-40, PWHT Requirements
File: BC82-166
Question (1): A nozzle is to be added to a vessel to be marked with the Code Symbol which was
previously postweld heat treated (PWHT). The weld is not exempted from PWHT by requirements such
as those of UCS-56(d) or Note 3(a) for P-No. 1 material of Table UCS-56. Is it necessary to heat a
circumferential band as required by UW-40(a)(5)?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): A nozzle in a vessel as described in Question (1) requires repair by welding. The repair
weld is not exempted from the requirements for postweld heat treatment as stated in Question (1) and is
too close to vessel shell to satisfy the heat treating requirements of UW-40(a)(6). Is it necessary to heat a
circumferential band as required by UW-40(a)(5)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Assume that a vessel has been previously PWHT due to service conditions specified by
the user in accordance with U-2(a) and that PWHT is not a Code requirement. If a nozzle or attachment
is added to the vessel, is it necessary to heat the circumferential band as in Questions (1) and (2)?
Reply (3): Yes, if PWHT is performed and the vessel is to be marked with the Code Symbol.
Question (4): Does the size of nozzle or attachment modify the reply to Question (3)?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): For the vessel described in Question (3) assume that an accidental weld arc was made on
the vessel after PWHT. Is the need for subsequent PWHT a contractual subject to be resolved between
manufacturer and user?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Figure 2-4, Weld Requirements with Corrosion
File: BC82-196
Question: Is the minimum throat thickness of 0.7c as referenced in sketch (8) of Fig. 2-4 intended to
be calculated in the corroded condition?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-240
Question (1): Are material test specimens exempted from heat treatment under UCS-85(b) when the
material, which is a P-No. 1, has undergone heat treatment during fabrication of the vessel above the
critical temperature, followed by postweld heat treatment?
Reply (1): No. The specimens must be subjected to the same manner of heat treatment, including
postweld heat treatment, as the material used in the vessel, since the heat treatment during fabrication
exceeded the critical temperature.
Question (2): Is it the intent of UCS-85(b) to test each plate, as defined by the test requirements of the
material specification, which has undergone a particular heat treatment?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-136(a)(3), Lifting Devices for Pressure Relief Valves
File: BC82-260
Question: Is it acceptable under the requirements of UG-136 to have a safety relief valve where a
ball valve member is used in place of a valve disk, and the ball valve is not mechanically attached to the
lifting mechanism?
Reply: Yes, unless the intended service of the safety relief valve is air, steam, or water over 140
°F.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure UW-16.1
File: BC82-264
Question (1): For category D joints in vessels constructed of SB-443 operating over 1000°F, does
sketch (d) in Fig. UW-16.1 meet the design requirements of UNF-19(c)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does sketch (e) in Fig. UW-16.1 meet the design requirements of UNF-19(c) for the
vessel described in Question (1)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Does sketch (f-4) in Fig. UW-1 6.1 meet the design requirements of UNF-19(c) for the
vessel described in Question (1)?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Multiple Openings
File: BC82-273
Question (1): When there are two openings close together in a shell, a flat spot sometimes develops
between the two openings. Do rules of Section VIII, Division 1, allow a type of strongback to be placed
on the inside of the shell before welding either nozzle and remain in place providing all other rules, such
as those of UW-2, UNF-19, and UHT-17, are satisfied?
Reply (1):. Yes.

Question (2): A flanged and dished head can be provided with either a 1 1/2 in. straight flange or a 6 in.
straight flange. Is there a point on the straight flange when the weld of the head-to-shell seam should be
considered as a shell-to-shell seam because of the length of the straight flange?
Reply (2): Since a circumferential shell-to-shell joint and a dished head-to-shell joint are both
Category B joints, Code requirements will be identical.
File: BC82-309
Question: Do the weld reinforcement requirements of UW-35(c) apply in the case of clad
construction with weld overlay seams after the weld overlay has been deposited, where the weld overlay
is not used for strength?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Acceptability of Alloy Steel Bars Under SA-193 Gr. B7
Material
File: BC82-314
Question: May non-welded SA-193 Gr. B7 be used as a pressure-resisting screw conveyor drive
shaft for a heat exchanger constructed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes. External pressure chart UCS-28.2 may be used to determine the maximum
permissible pressure on the shaft.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(i)
File: BC82-357
Question: UG-84(i)(3)(a) requires one vessel plate for each Qualified Welding Procedure used for
joints of Categories A and B. Since a welding procedure can consist of a large range of variables, can
welding be done using the same WPS on all Category A and B joints in a vessel with the vessel coupon
plate provided for any one of these joints?
Reply: Yes, however the welding procedure shall be qualified in accordance with Section IX and
address both essential and supplementary essential variables. [See UG-84(h).]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Gasket Factor m and Seating Stress y
File: BC82-398
Question: What gasket factor m and minimum design seating stress y can be used in the design of
flanges under Section VIII, Division 1, using Teflon 0-ring gaskets?
Reply: The values given for gasket factor m and seating stress y are solely recommendations and
are not mandatory. The Manufacturer has the responsibility to select the proper factors for the
appropriate gaskets used in flange design.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure UW-16.1, sketch (k)
File: BC82-402
Question: When a reinforcement ring is added to the outer side of the shell, do the rules applicable
to Fig. UW-1 6.1, sketch (k), require a fillet weld at the inner nozzle connection to the shell of not less
than 1/4 in. or 0.7t when the sum of the welds (tl + t2) exceeds < 1 1/4t and even though the design has
been proven satisfactory through acceptable calculations, proportional limit tests, and a thorough stress
analysis?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, 6-4 and 9.103
File: BC82-409
Question: The provisions of 6-4 and 9.103 in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, do not
contain a definition of "linear discontinuities" as it relates to magnetic particle examination. Is it
permissible to use the definition of "linear discontinuities" as given for liquid penetrant examination in B-
3 and 9-220 in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as VIII-2-83-02.
File: BC82-416
Question (1): Is there a need for a reduction factor on the allowable stress when calculating the required
thickness of a seamless shell (E = 1.0) attached with a corner joint to a nonextended tubesheet as shown
in sketches (a) through (g), or to an extended tubesheet as shown in sketches (h) through (l) of Fig. UW-
13.2?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Similarly, is a reduction factor required when a seamless shell is attached to a flange as
shown in sketches (m) and (n) of Fig. UW-13.2 or sketches (3) and (4) of Fig. 2.4?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): In reinforcement calculations, when both ends of the seamless shell are attached as
described above and no radiography is performed, what would the allowable stress reduction factor be
when calculating the required thickness of a seamless nozzle attached to this shell?
Reply (3): There would be no required reduction in allowable stress.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Thickness Values for go.
File: BC82-508
Question: In the fabrication of integral and optional type flanges where optional type is calculated
as integral in Appendix 2, must go be calculated as the minimum wall thickness of pipe when attached to
pipe?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-120(a), Distribution of Data Reports
File: BC82-509
Question: UG-120(a) states, in part, "A copy of the Manufacturer's Data Report shall be furnished
to the user or his designated agent and, upon request, to the Inspector." May the Manufacturer supply a
copy of the Manufacturer's Data Report Form for a completed vessel to a distributor, or supplier when no
final user is known, and by doing so, satisfy his Code responsibilities?
Reply: Yes. See the definition of designated agent in U-2.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UW-11(a)(7) and Table AF-241.1, Note (3), NDE of
Heavy-Walled Pressure Vessels
File: BC82-513
Question (1): May ultrasonic examination be used in place of radiographic examination in Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, for the following circumstance: when the wall thickness of the pressure vessel exceeds
16 in., and all of the seams cannot be radiographed with available equipment?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May ultrasonic examination be used in place of radiographic examination in Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, for the following circumstance: with the reason being that the construction of the
pressure vessel does not permit interpretable radiographs in accordance with Code requirements? When
one or more welds at a site are involved due to transportation limitation, etc., the radiographic
examination of the seams in a pressure vessel with wall thickness exceeding 8 in. is difficult.
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): With regard to Questions (1) and (2), may ultrasonic examination be used in place of
radiographic examination when a fully automatic ultrasonic examination procedure with complete record-
keeping made by a data processing computer is available?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-36(c)(3)(a) and (b)
File: BC82-518
Question: When a vessel has more than one opening and the openings do not fall under the
provisions of UG-42, are UG-36(c)(3)(a) and (b) applicable?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UHA-23, SA-240 Type 316
File: BC82-519
Question: Is it permissible to fabricate a vessel using SA-240 Type 316H material based on the
allowable stress values shown under SA-240 Type 316 in Table UHA-23?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UHA-23, Use of SA-479 Cr. XM-19 and XM-29
Material for Bolting up to 800° F
File: BC82-521
Question: Is it permissible to use SA-479 Cr. XM-19 and XM-29 material for bolting, including
studs and nuts, for temperatures from 20°F to 800°F, and use the allowable stresses in Table UHA-23 for
the material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-67(c)
File: BC82-546
Question: Is it required that a vessel designed in accordance with UCS-66(c) for service below -
20°F using P-No. 1 materials under 1 1/2 in. or I 1/4, through 1 1/2 in. with preheat be postweld heat
treated as set forth in UCS-67(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(7)
File: BC82-624
Question: Can the longitudinal butt welds in the U-bend and the circumferential welds which join
the U-bend to the shell of a heat exchanger for a Section VIII, Division 1, vessel be classified as the final
closure seam to allow substitution of UT for RT examination of the welds as specified in UW-11(a)(7),
when construction of the vessel does not permit their examination by radiography?
Reply: Yes, when agreeable with the Authorized Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-127, UG-129, and UG-136
File: BC82-405
Question (1): Assume that a rupture disk is to be used under conditions as follows:
(a) as the sole relief device in accordance with UG-1 27(a)(3)(a);
(b) between the vessel and a pressure relief valve with the combined capacity
determined by the 0.80 factor of UG-1 27(a)(3)(b)(2);
(c) on the outlet side of a spring-loaded safety relief valve in accordance with UG-1
27(a)(3)(c).
Under these conditions, is certification of the capacity of the rupture disk by any party other than the
manufacturer required?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If a rupture disk is installed between the vessel and a pressure relief valve, may the
combined capacity be determined and certified in accordance with UG-132?
Reply (2): Yes. See UG-1 27(a)(3)(b)(3).
Interpretation: V111-1-83-52
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-93(d)(3), Loadings
File: BC80-514
Question: In UG-93(d)(3), how may the determination of when 80% or more of the pressure load is
carried by the tubes, stays, or braces be made?
Reply: The determination of the UG-93(d)(3) requirement that 80%, or more, of the pressure
load on the plate or tubesheet is carried by the tubes, stays, or braces, shall consider the relative metal
areas, moduli of elasticity, and geometries of these components. The analytical determination shall be
made by using methods of analysis which will account for the structural interactions that occur between
these components when exposed to the pressure loadings.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Mottling Due to X-Ray Diffraction
File: BC81-56
Question (1): Is mottling due to X-ray diffraction which appears on a radiograph as a linear
radiographic image rejectable in accordance with UW-51 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No. See Section UW-51(b).
Question (2): If a radiographic indication has been found acceptable, are additional radiographs
necessary to prove that no rejectable discontinuities are being masked by the acceptable indication?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Welding of Expansion Joints
File: BC81-64
Question: Is it permissible to employ resistance spot welding or resistance seam welding for
nonpressure retaining welds in the construction of bellows expansion joints for Section VIII, Division 1,
vessels?
Reply: Yes, if the requirements of Code Case 1177, including the qualification requirements of
UW-28 and UW-3 1, are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11(c) and UW-16(f) Fittings and Miscellaneous Pressure
Parts
File: BC81-269
Question (1): May a fitting that satisfies the requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a) be installed similar to Fig.
UW-16.2, sketch (a), except that the fitting would be constructed so that the weld would be made from
the inside rather than the outside of the vessel?
Reply (1): No. See the first sentence of UW-16(f)(3)(a) which requires such fittings to be welded
from the outside.
Question (2): If a fitting satisfies all requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a), may it have a pressure containing
pipe not exceeding 3 in. NPS welded to it by a single fillet weld?
Reply (2): No. See the limitations in the title of UW-16(f).
Question (3): Assume that the fitting was as in Question (2) except that the pressure-containing pipe
was welded with a joint similar to Fig. UW-13.2(e) which satisfied the requirements of UW-13(e). Is
such construction acceptable?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): If the fitting and welded pressure-containing pipe constitute a part manufacturer's
standard instrument connection and satisfy all applicable Code requirements, may they be furnished to a
vessel manufacturer as miscellaneous pressure parts under the provisions of UG-11(c)?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix A, Table A-2, Tubesheet Joints
File: BC81-403
Question (1): Is the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, to allow the nominal pitch used in the design of
tubesheets for roller expanded joints calculated per Note (5) of Table A-2 to be less than the value of the
nominal pitch calculated per Note (5)(a)?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the joint is qualified in accordance with A-3 and A-4.
Question (2): Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, to allow the nominal pitch used in the design
of tubesheets for roller expanded joints qualified in accordance with A-3 and A-4 per Note (5)(a) of Table
A-2 to be less than the value of the nominal pitch calculated per Note (5)?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Figure UW-13.1, sketch (k)
File: BC81-404
Question (1): Are there provisions for increased stresses for SA-240, Type TP304 in Part ULT?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is the Committee presently considering changes in the restrictions of UW-13(c) of the
prohibition of ULT-17(d)applicable to the offset joints of Fig. UW-13.1, sketch (k)?
Reply (2): No.
Interpretations: VIII-1-83-58 (Void See 83-58R Page 167)

Subject: Section III-1, Impact Testing Requirements
File: BC81-609
Question: Is impact testing required for qualifying used in welding 1 in. NPS 6000 psi forged
coupling in a shell fabricated under Section VIII, Division 1 consisting of SA-240-304 clad on SA-302
Gr. B steel plate? The plate is subjected to a PWHT temperature of 915°F and the minimum operating
temperature is 550°F.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UCS-56(f), AF-112.1, and AF-420
File: BC81-656
Question (1): Is it permissible to utilize the repair rules and technique for laminar type discontinuities
given in Section III, Division 1, NB-5130(b), for repairs of laminar discontinuities exceeding 1 in. for
vessels fabricated under Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (1): Yes, provided all applicable requirements of Section VIII, Division 2, are satisfied.
Question (2): Is it permissible to utilize the repair rules and technique of Section III, Division 1, NB-
4622.9, for repairs to P-No. 1 and P-No. 3 materials and A-No. 1 or A-No. 2 weld filler metal without
subsequent postweld heat treatment as required by UCS-56 and AF-402 under Section VIII, Divisions 1
and 2?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Containment of Non-Code Material for Tubes in Shell and Tube
Heat Exchangers
File: BC82-659
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1, construction and certification, may nonmetallic tubes, or
tubes of other non-Code material, be used in heat exchangers of the fixed tubesheet, floating head, or the
U-tube types, provided that for both the shell-side and the tube-side chambers all of the following
requirements are met?
(1) MAWP and coincident temperature are the same for both chambers and is at least the
MAP for each chamber as if it were to be considered alone.
(2) Protected from overpressure by the required pressure relief devices.
(3) Parts that are common to both chambers are designed for at least the maximum
coincident operating pressure and temperature conditions.
Reply: No. The question applies to two independent pressure chambers as defined in UG-19.
The tubes are common to both chambers, neither chamber could be stamped and certified as a Code
vessel with tubes of non-Code material. The outside pressure boundary parts could be treated as a single
chambered vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-16(f)(3)(a)(2)
File: BC81-661
Question: Is the phrase "maximum size of the opening in the vessel in UW-16(f)(3)(a)(2) defined?
Reply: Yes. The maximum limitation on opening size is the lesser of the pipe O.D. plus 3/4 in.
when the pipe does not exceed 3 in., or ½ the vessel diameter.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Radiography Prior to Final Machining
File: BC81-685B
Question: When radiographing a weld in a part for Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, is it a
requirement that radiography for acceptance of the weld be performed after machining the weld to its
final thickness?
Reply: No. However, the penetrometer to be used when radiographing the weld for acceptance
must be based on the final thickness after machining of the weld in the finished part of the pressure
vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12 and Table UW-12
File: BC82-27
Question (1): A Section VIII, Division 1, vessel constructed under the provisions of UW-12(b) is spot
radiographed in accordance with UW-52. The radiograph of the Category A longitudinal butt joint at the
intersection of the Category B butt joint reveals a defect in the Category B butt joint. Must the defect in
the Category B butt joint be evaluated for acceptability under UW-52 and, if unacceptable, repaired, even
though the vessel can meet thickness requirements using a Category B butt joint efficiency of 70%?
Reply (1): Yes. The vessel is a spot-radiographed vessel and the provisions of UW-52 must be met
for butt welds regardless of category.
Question (2): The same vessel is constructed under the provisions of UW-12(c) and is spot
radiographed by the manufacturer for his own edification. The same rejectable indications are disclosed
in the radiograph. Do the rules of the Code require that the vessel manufacturer repair the weld?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(1), (4), and (5)
File: BC82-125
Question (1): Do the provisions of UW-11(a)(4) in Section VIII, Division 1, modify the radiography
requirements of UW-11(a)(1)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the provisions of UW-11(a)(5) in Section VIII, Division 1, modify the radiography
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11, Welding on Formed Heads With a Flued Manway
File: BC82-293
Question: A formed head containing an integral flued manway could be furnished under the
provisions of UG-11(b) or UG-77(c) without a Manufacturer's Partial Data Report and Part Stamping.
Assume that in order to provide for gasket seating surface, it is necessary to weld a ring to the flued
manway. May this be done under the provisions and requirements of UG-11(c)(2)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-45, Nozzle Neck Thickness
File: BC82-294
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, in determining the nozzle neck thickness according to UG-
45(a)(1) and UG-45(a)(4), one of the considerations is the required head thickness plus corrosion
allowance. When the nozzle is located entirely within the spherical portion of a torispherical head, will
the thickness which is considered for the head thickness be that calculated by UG-32(e) or that calculated
by UG-37(b)(1)?
Reply: When a torispherical head meets the exact proportions which permit the use of UG-32(e),
the minimum required thickness shall be calculated by the formula which is part of UG-32(e).
When a torispherical head has proportions other than those specified in UG-32(e), the required
thickness shall be calculated by the formula in 1-4(d).
The required head thickness to use when determining the minimum nozzle neck thickness under
UG-45 is based on one or the other of the thicknesses noted above depending upon the head proportions.
The thickness determined by UG-37(b)(1) shall not be used as it is used only for reinforcement
calculations.
File: BC82-306
Question (1): Does UG-44 permit the use of ANSI B16.9 butt welding fittings on pressure vessels
fabricated from pipe, without further calculations for the fittings, providing the grade and schedule of the
fittings are the same as the pipe shell, and no modifications are made on the fittings?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-11.
Question (2): If an ANSI B16.9 welding cap is used to close the ends of a pressure vessel fabricated
from pipe, and it is desired to attach a nozzle not exempt from reinforcement calculations, are
reinforcement calculations required, and if so, how shall they be computed when there is no allowable
stress given for SA-234 in Table UCS-23?
Reply (2): When a standard pressure-temperature rated ANSI B16.9 welding cap used to close the
ends of a pressure vessel has a nozzle attached, both the end cap and the nozzle reinforcement
requirements shall be calculated to meet the Code, using the allowable stress values for the applicable
material.
File: BC82-308
Question: May rings having sufficient moment of inertia as described in UG-29(c)(1), (2), and (3)
be used as external pressure stiffener rings without bridging the unsupported gap with a section having the
required moment of inertia?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-127 and UG-129
File: BC82-511
Question: If the requirements of UG-1 27(a) and UG-1 29(f) are met, is it mandatory for a rupture
disk manufacturer to hold a valid ASME Code symbol stamp?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix W, Recording Non-Pressure Attachments
File: BC82-529
Question: Is it required to describe all non-pressure attachments, such as lifting lugs, insulation
studs, platform, ladder, pipe brackets, etc., which are welded to a vessel on the Data Report Form under
"Remarks," or on supplementary Form U-4?
Reply: No, only vessel and superimposed equipment supports need be recorded, See Note (42)
of Table W-3.
File: BC82-587
Question: Does the existence of any one or more of conditions (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of UCS-79(d)
necessitate heat treatment when the specified extreme fiber elongation is less than 50%?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13(a)(2) and Figure UW-13.1 sketches (n) and (o)
File: BC82-593
Question: With regard to UW-13(a)(2) and Fig. UW-13.1 sketches (n) and (o), is the entire
following statement correct?
A shell course thinner than the skirt of the head to which it is attached may be attached without
regard to the relative positions of the center lines of the head skirt and shell course, provided the head
skirt has a minimum length of the smaller of three times the actual head thickness, or 1 1/2 in.
Transitions of proper length may be formed by adding additional weld metal on the shell side of the joint.
Such additional weld metal buildup shall meet the requirements of UW-42.
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(i)
File: BC82-663
Question: Outside of UG-84(i)(2), are there any circumstances relating to UG-84(i)(1) which permit
the vessel impact test plate to be made of material of the same specification as opposed to being from one
of the heats of metal used for the vessel or group of like vessels?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHA-51(c), UCS-56, and UNF-95
File: BC82-664
Question (1): Will the testing of one longitudinal root and one longitudinal face bend specimen from a
production test plate of welded titanium construction meet the intent of UNF-95?
Reply (1): Yes, providing all other requirements of UNF-95 are met.
Question (2): During postweld heat treatment, what minimum time interval may be used to calculate
the rate of heating above 800°F in UCS-56?
Reply (2): There is no minimum time interval to be used to calculate the heating or cooling rate.
The manufacturer should use a time interval that assures that the rate is uniform.
Question (3): Under the requirements of UHA-51(c), what should be the maximum temperature of heat
treatment below which a production weld coupon test specimen is not required to be tested?
Reply (3): Section VIII, Division 1, specifies a minimum temperature for postweld heat treatment
below which impact tests are required. it does not give a maximum temperature for postweld heat
treatment.
File: BC82-677
Question: Does the spacing between adjacent openings mentioned in UG-42(a) refer to the distance
between centers of the two openings?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-16(c) and Figure UW-16.1
File: BC82-678
Question: Are the following sketches from Fig. UW-16.1 examples of a nozzle with integral
reinforcement:
(1)sketch (a-1)
(2)sketch (d)
(3)sketch (e)
(4)sketch (z-2)
Reply:
(1) No.
(2) Yes.
(3) Yes.
(4) No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-77 (Void, see VIII-1-83-77R)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2(a), ERW Pipe for Lethal Service
File: BC82-679
Question: May electric resistance welded (ERW) pipe be used for the shell of a pressure vessel
designed for lethal service under UW-2(a) where no radiographic examination would be performed on the
ERW welded seam?
Reply: No. See UW-2(a). The provisions of UW-2(a)(2) and (3) do not apply.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-77R
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-2(a)
File: BC82-679*
Question: May electric resistance welded (ERW) pipe be used for the shell of a pressure vessel
designed for lethal service under UW-2(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 whether or not radiographic
examination is performed on the ERW welded seam?
Reply: No. See UW-2(a). The provisions of UW-2(a)(2) and (3) do not apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-9(d)
File: BC82-683
Question: Would the requirements of UW-9(d) be satisfied by buttwelding a circular piece at a

cross joint, of a diameter not less than 5 times the thickness of the shell?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(c)(2), Approval Process
File: BC82-684
Question: Is it the intent of UG-90(c)(2) that the approval process for Quality Control Procedures
for multiple duplicate vessels follow through a sequence of approvals, beginning with the inspection
agency, which provides written acceptance, then submits it to the legal jurisdiction for written acceptance,
which in turn submits it to the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel inspectors for written
acceptance?
Reply: No. The approval process as outlined in UG-90(c)(2) specifically mandates the inspection
agency to transmit the procedure, accepted by them, to the legal jurisdiction and to the National Board of
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors or to another representative designated by ASME for their written
acceptance.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UNF-57(c)
Date Issued-. December 29, 1982
File: BC82-719
Question: Does UNF-57(c) apply to a butt weld between a nonferrous material mentioned in this
paragraph and a carbon steel material even when the majority of the material constituting the vessel is
carbon steel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-729
Question: In UCS-79(d), does Rf, the final center line radius, apply to the dished radius or the
knuckle radius for the case of double curvature?
Reply Rf applies to the knuckle radius in the case of double curvature.
File: BC81-100
Question (1): Is it permissible to weld a transition section up to 1 1/2 in. in thickness on a head
according to UW-42(b), or as shown in Fig. ULW-17.2 sketch (f), without postweld heat treatment for P-
No. 1 materials, if the head requires postweld heat treatment?
Reply (1): No. The taper weld on the head requires postweld heat treatment.
Question (2): Is postweld heat treatment per UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1 required in layered
construction, Part ULW, 'where a layered section is welded to a solid section, the thickness exceeds 1 1/2
in., and all materials are P-No. 1?
Reply (2): No. See ULW-26(b).
Note: This Interpretation should have appeared in Interpretations No. 12, Section VIII, Division
1; covering the period of July 1, 1982 through April 1, 1983.
Interpretations VIII-1-83-82 (Void See I-83-82R Page 189)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 10, 10-12, Calibration of Test Equipment
File: BC80-289
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, 10-12 of Appendix 10, Quality Control System
requires that "the Manufacturer shall have a system for the calibration of examination, measuring, and test
equipment used...
Is traceability to standards of the National Bureau of Standards Required.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-2(i), Repairs Before Stamping
File: BC81-267
Question (1): A Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel experiences damage during the hydrostatic
test. Before stamping with the Code Symbol and completion of the Manufacturer's Data Report, it is
desired to modify or repair the construction of the pressure vessel to satisfy Code requirements. May this
work be performed by a U Symbol holder other than the symbol holder originally responsible for the
construction?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, what requirements apply?
Reply (2): The requirements parallel those for field assembly as defined in U-2(i).
Question (3): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, are there any national restrictions on the place of
business of the "other" symbol holder?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-23, EPC Reference for SA-737 Material
File: BC82-545
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, is the reference in the right-hand column of Table UCS-23 to
Fig. 5-UCS-28.4 correct for SA-737 Grade C material?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-85 (Same as question 1 of VIII-1-83-166 page 96)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Documentation for Qualification of NDE Examiners
File: BC82-811
Question: When a previous employer will not make documented records of qualification, training,
and experience of an NDE examiner available, may the hiring company use the individual's documented
personal history as a basis for experience level in his qualification and certification?
Reply: Yes. However, the individual shall be examined in accordance with the hiring company's
program for examination of NDE personnel.
File: BC82-813
Question (1): For a vessel that is fabricated with seamless heads and a welded shell, where there are
different welders welding both the circumferential and longitudinal joints, can the required spot
radiographs be taken solely on the longitudinal seam and meet the requirements of UW-52 in Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the requirements of UW-52(b)(2) are met, which state that one spot
radiograph be made for each 50 linear ft of weld and that every welder be represented by a spot
radiograph.
Question (2): If the requirements of UW-52 are met, can the vessel nameplate be stamped “RT3"?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If there is more than one welded shell course in a vessel, does the circumferential joint
attaching the courses need to be spot examined to satisfy UW-52 requirements?
Reply (3): Yes, if so chosen under UW-52(b)(3).
Question (4): If the circumferential seams in the vessel are not spot examined, do their lengths need to
be calculated toward the 50 ft requirement of UW-52(b)(1)?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; 1977 Edition Through W79 Addenda, Appendix 4
File: BC82-828
Note: The inquirer questioned provisions in the 1977 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1 through the
W79 Addenda. Since the 1980 Edition is technically compatible and reference paragraphs have been
renumbered, the following Questions and Replies are based on the 1980 Edition.
Question (1): Are the requirements of 4-2(c) in Appendix 4 of Section VIII, Division 1 intended to
define t, as related to acceptance criteria for rounded indications as specified in 4-3?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the above paragraph is the definition of t, in the case of full penetration butt weld,
would t be the thickness of the weld or the thickness of the material (since the weld with reinforcement
would always be greater than the material thickness)?
Reply (2): t would be the thickness of the weld.
Question (3): For a butt weld, would the value for t used for evaluation of slag inclusions in accordance
with UW-51 be the nominal wall thickness plus the permissible reinforcement?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): In the example cited above, would the value of t used for rounded indication Acceptance
Criteria be the nominal wall thickness plus the permissible reinforcement?
Reply (4). Yes.
File: BC82-845
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UW-16(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 to
obtain the required penetration tw, as shown for example in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (q), by using welding
processes such as semiautomatic SAW with square groove penetration?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2(b) and UHA-51(a), SA-240 T304 Material
File: BC82-685
Question: Are full penetration welds for Category D joints as specified in UW-2(b) required for
vessels constructed of SA-240 T304 stainless steel when the filler metal is AWS-A5.9 ER-308L Si and
when impact testing is waived by UHA-51(a) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-52(b)(2)
File: BC82-737
Question: Do the provisions of UW-52(b)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 require the application of
spot radiography to represent each welding process used by an individual welder/operator?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, 2-2
File: BC82-738
Question (1): 2-2(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 requires that bolted flange materials must comply with
UG-4 through UG-14. Is it permissible to use materials that comply with UG-15 for flanges designed in
accordance with Appendix 2?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): 2-2(d)(2)(b) gives the method of determining the thickness of a hubbed flange, formed
into a ring from bar or plate, to be used in determining postweld heat treatment and radiographic
requirements of the welded butt joints. Does this requirement also apply to hubless flanges similar to
those shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (1), (1 a), (2), (7), (8), (9) and 2-9 covering split loose flanges containing
similar butt welded joints?
Reply (2): Yes. See UCS-56(d) and Table UCS-56.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-92 (Void See 83-92R Page 121)

Subject: Section VIII-I, UG-23(b)
File: BC82-756
Question (1): Are the allowable compressive stresses established in accordance with UC-23(b) of
Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to primary stresses only or to the sum of primary and secondary
stresses (including thermal stress)?
Reply (1): The requirements of UG-23(b) are applicable to primary stresses only.
Question (2): For a vessel subjected to a combination of loadings, such as axial compressive loading on
a cylindrical shell and external pressure, are there methods in Section VIII, Division 1 to determine the
acceptability of the vessel due to the interaction of the loadings?
Reply (2): Yes, only as provided in UG-23(a).

File: BC82-783
Question (1): May welders or welding operators not qualified in accordance with Section IX of the
Code make tack welds which neither become a portion of final pressure welds nor become a portion of
final welds attaching nonpressure parts to pressure parts under the requirements of UW-31(c) of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to the above is affirmative, is any permanent identification of such
nonqualified tack welders or welding operators required?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-42, Reinforcement of Multiple Openings
File: BC82-784
Question: When there are multiple openings in a shell or header and each has sufficient
reinforcement by calculation, within the reinforcement limits, to satisfy individual reinforcement
requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, can each opening therefore be considered a single opening and
not require calculation using the ligament efficiency factor?
Reply: Yes, see UG-42.
File: BC82-787
Question (1): Is R, used in the formula in Section VIII, Division 1, UG-27(c)(1), the inside radius of the
shell plus the thickness added for corrosion?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does the Table A-2 of SA-106 in Section I1 have any bearing on the Section VIII, UG-27
calculations?
Reply (2): Yes, see UG-16(d).
File: BC82-801
Question: In the case of two identical flanges (using identical gaskets) attached to a tubesheet, is W
as defined in 2-3 of Section VIII, Division 1 the same for both flanges?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-56, Exemption Notes
File: BC82-806
Question: Is the word "studs" of the exemption Notes to Table UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1
meant to also include insulation pins?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-807
Question: Does 1-7 in Appendix 1 of Section VIII, Division 1 intend to make the sum of the area
available within the two limits equal to or greater than two-thirds of the required area of reinforcement?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(c)(5)
File: BC82-808
Question: Are valves excluded from Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 as specified in U-1(c)(5)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56 and Table UCS-56
File: BC82-825
Question: Is PWHT required by Table UCS-56 Section VIII, Division 1 for the weld joints in the
following conditions? In each case all material is P-No. 1, and the service requirements of UCS-67 and
UW-2(a) are not applicable.
(a)A 5/8 in. thick shell is attached to a 3 in. thick tubesheet using the attachment weld geometry
of Fig. UW-1 3.2 sketch (f) of Section VIII, Division 1.
(b)A 5/8 in. thick nozzle that is 8 in. in diameter is attached to a 3 in. thick shell using the
attachment weld geometry of Fig. UW-1 6.1 sketch (a) of Section VIII, Division 1.
(c)A 5/8 in. thick clip (nonpressure part) is attached to a 3 in. thick shell using a full penetration
weld through the thickness of the clip.
Reply:
(a) No.
(b) No.
(c) No.
File: BC82-840
Question: When determining the number of spot radiographs required to comply with UW-52 of
Section VIII, Division 1, should all longitudinal and circumferential butt welded seam lengths of a
multicourse vessel be added together regardless of the joint efficiencies used in the calculations for the
longitudinal and circumferential stresses?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-843
Question: May the rules of UG-37(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied
when calculating the minimum nozzle wall thickness in accordance with UG-45(a)(1)?
Reply: No.
Date Issued- March 3, 1983
File: BC82-873
Question: UCS-56(c) in Section V111, Division 1 states, "When pressure parts of two different P-
Number groups are joined by welding, the postweld heat treatment shall be that specified in Table UCS-
56 with applicable Notes for the material requiring the higher postweld temperature." If both materials
have the same holding temperature, does the manufacturer have the choice of which requirements to use
for postweld heat treatment?
Reply: No. All the applicable Notes apply regardless of holding temperatures. The most
stringent takes precedence.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-I(g); and Section I, Preamble
File: BC79-780
Question: U-1(g) of Section V111, Division 1 states:
Unfired-steam boilers as defined in Section I shall be constructed in accordance with the rules of
Section I or this Division [see UG-1 25(b) and UW-2(c)].
` The following pressure vessels in which steam is generated shall be constructed in accordance
with the rules of this Division:
(1) vessels known as evaporators or heat exchangers;
(2) vessels in which steam is generated by the use of heat resulting from operation of a processing
system containing a number of pressure vessels, such as used in the manufacture of chemical and
petroleum products.
Are these provisions in conflict with the third from the last paragraph of the Preamble of Section I?
Reply: No, as illustrated by reasons as follows:

(a) The definitions of pressure vessels in which steam is generated, but which are not "unfired
steam boilers," are identical in both Sections I and VIII. Such vessels are not within the Scope of Section
I. They are within the Scope of Section VIII, and the special rules applicable to "unfired steam boilers,"
such as UW-2(c), are not required.
(b) The second from the last paragraph of the Preamble of Section I requires "unfired steam
boilers" to be constructed in accordance with its rules or the applicable rules of Section VIII.
(c) As quoted in the Question, Section VIII requires "unfired steam boilers" to be constructed in
accordance with its special, applicable rules, such as UW-2(c).
We caution you that the laws or regulations at the point of installation may dictate the
construction. As indicated by footnote 1 to U-1 Scope of Section VIII, such laws or regulations should be
reviewed to determine requirements that may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules. Some
applicable laws or regulations may require such vessels to be constructed either with the provisions of
UW-2(c) applied or under the rules of Section I
Note: This Interpretation also appears as 1-83-37.
File: BC82-798
Question: Does heat treatment per UCS-56 satisfy the requirements of UCS-79(d) of Section VIII,
Division 1, when the extreme fiber elongation is considerably more than 5% and any of conditions (1)
through (5) exist?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-798
Question: During certification or recertification tests of pressure relief valves built to the
requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, is it intended that chatter or flutter of the valve is cause for
rejection?
Yes. In accordance with UG-131(f), the referenced testing procedures of ASME PTC
25.31976 require that a steady-state condition must be established and maintained before reading and
recording data. A valve which chatters or flutters at the flow rating pressure is not considered to be under
steady-state conditions.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-35(c)
File: BC82-169
Question (1): The fusion zone for a deposited weld overlay procedure reduces the thickness of the
base material, Is it required under Part UCL in Section VIII, Division 1 that the Manufacturer allow
additional base material thickness to provide for the loss due to corrosion resistant weld overlay dilution?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When removing a defect in the corrosion resistant deposited weld metal, the base material is
penetrated a significant depth over a significant area.
(a) Is it required that the Manufacturer restore the base material thickness with like material before
proceeding to restore the corrosion resistant deposited weld metal overlay?
(b) May the Manufacturer restore the base material thickness with corrosion resistant deposited weld
metal?
Reply (2):
(a) No, provided the corrosion resistant deposited weld metal is of equal strength at the design
temperature. See Interpretation VIII-80-1 7.
(b) Yes. See reply to (a), above.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCI-101 and, UCD-101
File: BC80-053
Question: May the tests to destruction provided for in UCI-101 and UCD-101 of Section VIII,
Division 1 be terminated when the test pressure reaches the point required to establish the maximum
allowable pressure?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-195
Question: Are the requirements of UG-12(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to bolts?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-53(g) and Fig. UG-53.6
File: BC82-864
Question: What is the definition of s as shown in Fig. UG-53.6 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply:
s = Longitudinal dimension of diagonal pitch p'
= P, Cos Ø
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116(n)(2), UM Stamp
File: BC83-022
Question (1): The second paragraph of UG-116(n)(2), Section VIII, Division 1 contains special
provisions for permission to use the UM Stamp by U or S Stamp Holders, if such U or S Stamp Holders
have not built any U Stamped or S Stamped vessels during the period of time that a UM Certificate of
Authorization is in force. Is that fact a reason to refuse authorization under these special provisions?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the "special provisions" of Question (1) apply to a U-2 Stamp Holder as well as a U
Stamp Holder?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-120(a), U-3 Certificate of Compliance
File: BC83-032
Question: Must a vessel manufacturer complete a U-3 Certificate of Compliance, as required by

UG-120(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, even when the manufacturer keeps an accurate detailed account of
the information required to complete the U-3 in his construction records as defined in his Quality Control
System and keeps this information for each individual pressure vessel for a minimum of 5 years?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34 and Table UW-12
File: BC83-033
Question: In UG-34(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, should the "Category A weld" referenced in the
definition of E, the joint efficiency, be changed to read "Category C weld"?
Reply: No. The value of E as ' indicated above pertains to the joint efficiency to be used for a
Category A butt weld within the flat head or cover.
File: BC81-130
Question (1): Under the requirements of UCS-85(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, material from which
test specimens are prepared shall be heated at the specified temperature within reasonable tolerance, such
as are normal in actual fabrication. What is a reasonable tolerance?
Reply (1): A reasonable tolerance depends on the heat treating response of the specific materials.
Question (2): Under the requirements of UCS-85(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, may the total time at
temperature when postweld heat treating the test specimens be greater than 100% of the total time at the
PWHT temperature during actual fabrication of the product?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the material (SA-387 Grade 1, Class 2) is supplied in normalized and tempered
condition, and the material is subjected to postweld heat treatment during fabrication at a temperature
which is below the tempering temperature at the mill, must the test specimen material heat treatment
include such postweld heat treatment?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): If the material, SA-204 Grade B, 1 in. thick, is furnished by the mill with test results in
the as-rolled condition and in the simulated heat treated condition, including postweld heat treatment, is it
still required to conduct the tests required by UCS-85 for the following three cases?
(a) The material is subjected to postweld heat treatment during fabrication at a temperature range
above the minimum temperature and the minimum hold times required by Table UCS-56 but below the
specified temperature range performed during the simulated postweld heat treatment at the mill.
(b) The material is subjected to postweld heat treatment during fabrication at a temperature
range above the minimum temperature and the minimum hold times required by Table UCS-56 but for
hold times which do not satisfy the requirements of UCS-85 compared to those performed during the
simulated postweld heat treatment at the mill.
(c) The material is subjected to a postweld heat treatment temperature range during
fabrication at the alternate postweld heat treatment temperatures and longer hold times of Table UCS-56.1
instead of the simulated postweld heat treatment temperature range and hold time performed at the mill,
and which met the requirements of Table UCS-56.
Reply (4): The answer in all cases is yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Flange Design
File: BC81-514
Question (1): May a flange with an integral hub as shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (3) and (4) be
calculated as an integral type under optional type flanges, attached as shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (8),
8a), and (8b)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): What dimensions should be used for go, gi, and h for the flange described in Question
(1)?
Reply (2): The following are the dimensions to be used:

go = the thickness of the shell or nozzle neck to which the flange is attached
g1 = the thickness of the large section of the hub plus the shell or nozzle neck thickness to which
the flange is attached
h = the length of the hub plus the leg length of the weld attaching the hub to the shell or nozzle
neck
File: BC81-559
Question: Would the requirements of UCS-85(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 be met if test plates in
the normalized condition are used to represent P-No. 1, Grade Nos. 1 and 2 material, both in the
normalized and as-rolled condition?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2(b) and UHA-51
File: BC82-305
Question (1): A vessel is fabricated of Type 304 or 304L stainless steel base and weld metal and has a
design temperature of -100°F. Impact tests are not waived by the first paragraph of UHA-51(b). Do the
requirements of UW-2(b)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 need to be met?
Reply (1): Yes. The weld requires impact tests per UHA-51(b)(5)(b). Therefore, the requirements
of UW-2(b)(3) are mandatory.
Question (2): Is it the intent of UW-2(b) that whenever any impact tests of the base material or weld
metal are required in accordance with UG-84, the specific requirements of UW-2(b) are mandatory?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-99(g), Gas Leak Test in Lieu of Visual inspection
File: BC82-397
Question: May air be used as the medium to satisfy the requirements for a gas leak test in
accordance with UG-99(g)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Tables UCS-56 and UHA-32
File: BC82-411
Question (1): In Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-56, is it required to postweld heat treat fillet
welds that are used as strength welds in attaching tubes to the inside of a drum or a header when the drum
or header material and the tube material are of the same P-No. 4 or P-No. 5 groupings?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Except as excluded by Note (1) for P-No. 6 and by Notes (1) and (3) for P-No. 7 of Table
UHA-32, is it required to postweld heat treat fillet welds that are used as strength welds in attaching tubes
to the inside of a drum or a header when the drum or header material and the tube material are of the same
P-No. 6 of P-No. 7 groupings?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC83-030
Question: When designing nozzle thickness according to UG-45 of Section VIII, Division 1 for
internal pressure only, may the requirements of UG-45(a)(1) be used instead of those in UG-45(a)(4)?
Reply: No, both the requirements of UC-45(a)(1) and (a)(4) shall be considered.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Repair of Bronze Castings
File: BC81-184
Question: May porosity defects that are discovered during a pneumatic pressure test complying
with UG-100 after all manufacturing and brazing operations have been completed, in a part of a pressure
vessel that is manufactured from an SB-61 bronze casting, be sealed by vacuum impregnating with
sodium silicate?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not prohibit the use of vacuum impregnation of bronze
castings after machining. Note (4) to Table UNF-23.2 specifically prohibits welding or brazing of SB-61
castings. (See also U NF-8.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-79, UW-11, UCS-57, and UCS-85
File: BC82-549
Question(1): Is it a requirement under UW-11 of Section VIII, Division 1 to radiograph the butt welds
within dished heads and longitudinal welds in shells of vessels if welding is carried out prior to forming
the dished heads and/or shells when the design stresses of the vessel are based on visual inspection?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Is there any Code restriction for the minimum distance between two longitudinal welds in
the same course of the shell or distance between two consecutive circumferential welds?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Are the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 for radiography and heat treatment
applicable to joints in flanges fabricated from plate?
Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-123 (Void see 83-121R-2 page 189)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Code Case 1409-5
File: BC82-834
Question: Does paragraph 5(a) of Code Case 1409-5 permit WPS's qualified using Grade I coupons
to be used in lieu of WPS's qualified using Grade 2 coupons?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UW-12
File: BC82-842
Question: Table UW-1 2 of Section VIII, Division 1 indicates the "Limitations" for Type (3) joints
as "Circumferential joints only, not over 5/8 in. thick and not over 24 in. outside diameter." Does this
limitation preclude the use of Type (3) joints for other than circumferential joints?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC82-863
Question: Is it the intent of Code Case 1177-7 to apply to an expansion joint assembly which
includes the convoluted expansion bellows elements and the attached ring on each end necessary to weld
the assembly into the vessel?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-66(c)(2)
File: BC83-073
Question: When a vessel is designed for low-temperature operation, in accordance with UCS
66(c)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1, e.g., no material impact tests, and a 2 1/2 factor on the pressure, is
it required that impact tests be made on weld procedure qualifications or on vessel (production) welds?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-66(c)(2)
File: BC83-083
Question: Is the impact testing requirement exemption of UCS-66(c)(2) of Section VIII,

Division 1 applicable to vessels with flanged joints for use below -20°F?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-99 and AT-300, Consideration of Bolting
Material
File: BC83-072
Question (1): In establishing hydrostatic test pressures in accordance with UG-99 of Division 1 and
Article T-3 of Division 2, shall the allowable stress of bolts be considered?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In Division 2, Tables AM-214.1 and AM-214.2, the values for bolting materials are
titled "allowable bolt stress values." Shall these values be used as "design intensity values" in applying
the rules of Article T-3?
Reply (2): Yes.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as VIII-2-83-1 0.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions I and 2, UG-136(a)(2) and AR-200(200)(b), Permanent Set of
Pressure Relief Valve Springs
Date Issued: June 1 7, 1983
File: BC81-583
Question (1): In UG-136(a)(2) and AR-200(b) of Section VII 1, Divisions 1 and 2, what is meant by
presetting at room temperature"?
Reply (1): This means that a spring has been previously compressed to its solid height at room
temperature.
Question (2): How is presetting at room temperature accomplished?
Reply (2): The spring is compressed to its solid height by any suitable means.
Question (3): What effect does presetting have on the spring material?
Reply (3): The Code does not address the effect of presetting on the spring material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Divisions 1 and 2, Appendix P and Fig. 4-130.1
File: BC81-717
Question (1): The dotted lines shown in Fig. 4-130.1 of Section VIII, Division 2 are classified as
operating loads. May the operating temperature and pressure be used in the design calculations?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, may an average stress for creep rate of 0.2%
per 20,000 hr be taken as equal to 0.01% per 1,000?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; 1-5 and 1-8
File: BC82-209
Question (1): If reinforcement is required at the cylinder-to-cone junction and a compression ring is not
used, is it the intent of 1-5 and 1-8 of Section VIII, Division 1 that reinforcement may be provided by
thickening the shell only, or can both the cylinder and cone thickness be increased?
Reply (1): Either the cylinder, the cone, or both thicknesses may be increased.
Question (2): Is it permissible to weld a weld neck flange directly to the cone at either end without a
transition shell?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (f)
File: BC82-298
Question (1): When using the intermediate head design shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f), in Section
VIII, Division 1, and each chamber is designed as a separate vessel, are there any limitations on the
allowable difference in thickness between ts1 and ts2?
Reply (1): No
Question (2): When ts1 and ts2 are different, is a taper of 3:1 required on any part of the joint?
Reply (2): Yes, when required by UW-9(c).
Question (3): If a taper is required, are there any limitations on thickness?

Reply (3): Yes, as necessary to provide minimum required thicknesses at all locations.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-133 (Void see 83-133R page 87)

Subject: Section VIII, UW-51(b) and Appendix 4
File: BC82-718
Question: If a rounded indication on a weld radiograph is interpreted as incomplete fusion, is it

rejectable as addressed in UW-51(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1, even if it is acceptable as a rounded
indication as defined in 4-2(a) of appendix 4 and does not exceed the size limitation given in Table 4-1?
Reply: Yes. Incomplete fusion is rejectable, regardless of the size or shape of the indication.
Note: On July 7, 1983 this Reply was withdrawn for further committee consideration.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(b)(8) and UG-78
File: BC83-151
Question: Do the words "repairs" and "defects in material" in UG-90(b)(8) and UG-78,
respectively, in Section VIII, Division 1, apply to the material that is supplied to the Manufacturer of the
vessel prior to fabrication?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC83-159
Question(1): Does t, the minimum required thickness of head after forming, in UG-32 of Section VIII,
Division 1 apply to the thickness of the entire head including that at the knuckle radius?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it the intent of "minimum required thickness of head after forming" in UG-32 that the
thinnest part of the head be of at least this thickness, with no limitation on the maximum thickness?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-1
File: BC83-224
Question (1): Are the Code rules of UCL in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable for a nozzle lining
which is neither integrally clad nor attached to the base material by welding?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any restrictions in the use of material for such lining?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-35, Cosmetic Welding Subsequent to Hydrostatic Testing
File: BC82-782
Question (1): Is it permissible to have cosmetic welding performed after the final hydrostatic test to
comply with UW-35 in Section VIII, Division 1 when no rehydrostatic test is made?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any other means of nondestructive testing, such as MT, PT, or UT, the use of
which after cosmetic welding would preclude the necessity of a second hydrostatic test?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC82-880
Question: In determining the required thickness of a nozzle neck according to UG-45(a) of Section
VIII, Division 1, when do the requirements of UG-45(a)(1) through (4) apply?
Reply: Except for access and inspection openings, when the required thickness of the nozzle
neck determined by UG-45(a) is smaller than the least thickness obtained by using UG-45(a)(1) through
(4), the required thickness set by the least of UG-45(a)(1) through (4) controls,
File: BC83-132
Question(1): For a given design pressure and cone apex angle, will a reduction in stress value decrease
the likelihood of the juncture requiring reinforcement?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For a given cone apex angle and stress value, will a decrease in design pressure increase
the likelihood of the juncture requiring reinforcement?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are cone reinforcement requirements independent of shell diameter?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Are joint efficiency factors E1, and E2 always equal to 1.0 for junctions with the large
cylinder?
Reply (4): Yes.
Question (5): Are joint efficiency factors E1, and E2 always equal to the joint efficiency E of UW-12
for junctions with the small cylinder?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Shell Alignment. UG-28(f); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (n); UW-
33(a)
File: BC82-285
Question(1): UG-28(f) of Section VIII, Division 1 indicates that vessels stamped for external pressure
of 15 psi or less shall be designed for the smaller of 15 psi or 25% more than the maximum possible
external pressure. If a vessel is to be stamped for 10 psi external pressure, is the required design pressure
1.25 X 10 or 12.5 psi?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For head-to-shell attachments, does the maximum center line offset of Fig. UW-13.1 of
Section VIII, Division 1 supersede the edge alignment tolerance of UW-33(a)?
Reply (2): No. The maximum center line offset of Fig. UW-13.1 is a design requirement. The
alignment tolerance specified in UW-33(a) is a fabrication tolerance for misalignment. Both requirements
must be met.
File: BC82-833
Question: Under the provisions of UW-52(d)(2)(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, the Manufacturer
elects to radiograph the entire unit of weld, and repair any defective welds. Does one spot radiograph at
one of the repaired locations satisfy the requirements of UW-52(d)(2)(c)?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-142 (Same as VIII-1-83-140)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-28(f) and UG-1 1 6
File: BC83-168
Question: UG-28(f) of Section VIII, Division 1 indicates that vessels stamped for external pressure
of 15 psi or less shall be designed for the smaller of 15 psi or 25% more than the maximum possible
external pressure. If a vessel is to be stamped for 10 psi external pressure, is the required design pressure
1.25 X 10 or 12..5 psi?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-143 (Same as VIII-1-83-137)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Welding After Hydrostatic Testing
File: BC82-222
Question (1): Is it permissible to have cosmetic welding performed after the final hydrostatic test to
comply with UW-35 in Section VIII, Division 1 if no subsequent hydrostatic test is made?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any other means of nondestructive testing, such as MT, PT, or UT, the use of
which after cosmetic welding would preclude the necessity of a second hydrostatic test?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13(e) and UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC83-198
Question (1): Does the term "rolled plate" in UW-13(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 refer to flat plate as
rolled at the mill?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it required as described in UG-93(d)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 to examine by

magnetic particle or liquid penetrant a joint preparation similar to the one shown in Fig. UW-1.32 sketch
(c) except that both plates are of the same dimension (3/4 in.) and the b dimension is the thickness of the
plate?
Reply (2): The joint described in Question (2) is not acceptable. Flat closure plates on cylindrical
vessels would require compliance to Fig. UW-13.2 for tp dimension in sketches (b), (c), and (d), and the
requirements of UG-93(d)(3) shall apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Markings, UG-116(c)
File: BC83-200
Question: Is it required under UG-116(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 that the letters "S-W" be
applied under the Code Symbol for a vessel constructed with seamless hemispherical heads arc welded to
a seamless shell?
Reply: Yes. See the concluding paragraph of UG-116(c).
Subject: Calibration of Welding Equipment, Sections 1, IV, and VIII, Divisions 1 and 2
File: BC80-38C
Question: Is it a requirement of Section I, IV, or VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, that manual,

semiautomatic, and automatic welding equipment be calibrated, and if so, that the devices used for
calibration be calibrated?
Reply: No.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as 1-83-45, IV-83-22, and VIII-2-83-1 7.
Subject: Tack Welding, Sections 1, IV, and VIII-I
File: BC80-173
Question: A manufacturer, holder of a valid U, S, H, or M Certificate of Authorization, sub-
contracts an outside organization to roll a shell, which is to be part of a stamped boiler or vessel, and to
perform tack welding to secure the longitudinal seam alignment. The outside organization is not part of
the Certificate holder's organization. Under what conditions may this work be performed?
Reply: In accordance with PW-31 of Section I, HW-810 of Section IV, and UW-31 of Section
VIII, Division 1, tack welds, whether removed or left in place, shall be made using a fillet weld or butt
weld procedure qualified to Section IX. Tack welds to be left in place shall be made by welders qualified
to Section IX and shall be examined visually for defects, and if found to be defective, shall be removed, It
is not necessary that a subcontractor performing such tack welds for the boiler or vessel manufacturer be a
holder of an ASME Certificate of Authorization. The final boiler or vessel manufacturer shall maintain
the controls to assure the necessary welding procedure and performance qualifications are met in order to
satisfy Code requirements.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as 1-83-46 and IV-83-23.
Interpretation: VIII-82-45 (Withdrawn)

Subject: VIII-1, UCS-66(b)
File: BC81-038
Question (1): For a pressure vessel designed for low temperature service (-50°F) and internal pressure
and that utilizes backing strips, left in place in the welding of the head to shell joints, must the ring girders
and backings strips meet the requirements of UCS-66(b) for low temperature service?
Reply (1): Ring girders directly attached to the vessel by welding and backing strips left in place as
described in Question (1) are considered to material used in the construction of the vessel. Therefore they
are subject to the provisions of UCS-66(b).
Question (2): In the vessel described in Question (1), may SA-36 material be used for ring girders and
the backing strips?
Reply (2): No. See UCS-6 and UCS-66.

Note: On November 12, 1982, this Interpretation was withdrawn for further Committee
consideration. This withdrawal notice should have appeared in Interpretations No. 12-Section
VIII,-1, covering Interpretations issued from July 1, 1982, through December 31, 1982, and revised
Interpretations issued from July 1, 1982, through April 1, 1983.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-51(b) and Appendix 4
File: BC82-718*
Question: If a rounded indication on a weld radiograph is interpreted as incomplete fusion, is it

rejectable as addressed in UW-51(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1, even if it is acceptable as a
rounded indication as defined in 4-2(a) of Appendix 4 and does not exceed the size limitation given in
Table 4-1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC83-036
Question: In UG-81(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, what shall be considered the spherical portion of
an ellipsoidal head?
Reply: The part of an ellipsoidal head that is to be considered the spherical portion is that part
which is located within a circle the center of which coincides with the center of the head and the diameter
of which is equal to 80% of the shell diameter.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix L-7
File: BC83-120
Question: In Appendix L-7 of Section VIII, Division 1, when fr1 = 1, will A and A1, be equal to
zero?
Reply: No. In this case, A = dtrF and A, = d(E1 t - Ftr,).
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, ULW-16(b) and AD-110(a)
File: BC82-652
In the fabrication of multilayered vessels, the following parameters exist. The inner shell is made
of carbon steel, low alloy, or austenitic material. Over the inner shell a dummy layer is used, which is
only tack welded. Over the dummy layer the other layers are fully welded. UG-27 and AD-201 of
Section VIII, Divisions I and 2, require R to be the inside radius in deriving the shell thickness
calculation.
Question (1): Is it permissible in calculating the inside radius R to use the dimension corresponding to
the inner shell I.D. only, where the dummy layer is between the inner shell and regular layers?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Can the dummy layer which is only tack welded be considered as part of the thickness of
the shell contributing to the strength and resisting the loading conditions, since it is securely in position
between the inner shell and other regular layers?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Can the inner shell strength be considered in determining the shell thickness when a
dummy layer is present subject to meeting the requirements of AD-110(a) and ULW-16(b)?
Reply (3): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Stress Values and Joint Efficiencies
File: BC83-167
Question(1): Are there any nondestructive tests that may be used on welded pipe or tubing to increase
the allowable stress in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any nondestructive tests that may be used on welded pipe or tubing to increase
the joint factor in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Appendix 1-5 and AD-210
File: BC83-169
Question (1): Can Appendix 1-5 of Section VIII, Division 1, be applied to an offset cone such as a
kettle-type reboiler?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Can AD-210 of Section VIII, Division 2, be applied to offset cones?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 14-40
File: BC83-170
Question: When a channel cover consisting of a flat cover, a bolted flange, and a hublike projection
is machined from a solid plate, and is attached by through bolting rather than welding, do the rules of
Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 14-40, apply? The hublike projection is used to provide a gasket
seating surface in the same manner as a raised face on a conventional flange,
Reply: No.
Subject-. Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 PWHT Welded Buttered Joints; Dissimilar Metal
Attachments
File: BC83-197
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 or 2 construction, is it permissible to weld an austenitic

stainless (P-No. 8) steel nozzle into carbon steel (P-No. 1) shell or head after postweld heat treatment,
provided the carbon steel weld joint preparation is buttered in accordance with the requirements of
Section IX with an austenitic stainless steel before postweld heat treatment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-51(a)(3), Winter 1982 Addenda
File: BC83-201
Question (1): Is it required that the manufacturer requalify and recertify his NDE personnel to a
program developed using the 1980 Edition of SNT-TC-1A as a guide, as referenced in UW-51(a)(3) of
Section VIII, Division 1, if the personnel are presently qualified and certified to a program developed
using the 1975 Edition of SNT-TC-1A as a guide?
Reply (1): No. However, when his present certification expires, he must then be requalified and
recertified to a program developed using the latest edition of the SNT-TC-IA document adopted by the
Code.
Question (2): May NDE personnel qualified and certified to the manufacturer's program developed
using the 1980 Edition of the SNT-TC-1A as a guide perform nondestructive examinations on items being
constructed to an addendum which referenced the 1975 Edition of SNT-TC-1A?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix A, A-1(a)
File: BC83-207
Question: Do the present rules in Appendix A for tubesheet design apply only to tubesheets which
derive some of the support of the pressure load from the tubes?
Reply: Yes. The present rules do not apply to U-tube and floating head construction where no
support of the tubesheet comes from the tubes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-51(a)(3) and 12-2
File: BC83-210
Question (1): Are the recommended guidelines contained in SNT-TC-1A 1980 considered minimum
requirements to be addressed in the employer's written practice?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May the detailed recommendations contained in SNT-TC-1A 1980 be reviewed and
modified by the employer to meet particular needs, e.g., limited certification?
Reply (2): Yes, as described in Interpretation V-80-05.
Question (3): To what extent may the detailed recommendations of SNT-TC-1A 1980 be modified by
the employer to meet particular needs?
Reply (3): The extent that the program may be modified can only be determined by the
Manufacturer subject to the scope of his activities. The program will be reviewed and accepted at the
time of the joint review and on an ongoing basis by the Authorized Inspector.
File: BC83-262
Question: Would a welded head and/or head skirt with longitudinal welds be required to satisfy the
rules of UW-9(d) for shell courses of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2 and UW-16
File: BC83-034
Question: Do the provisions in UW-2 of Section VIII, Division 1, take precedence over general
requirements in other paragraphs? That is, does a requirement, such as that given in UW-2(b)(4), which
requires all Category D joints to be full penetration welds, take precedence over a general rule, such as
that given in UW-16(d), which permits nozzles to be attached by fillet and partial penetration welds?
Reply: Yes. Throughout Section VIII, Division 1, there are special provisions which take
precedence over general rules. For example, the requirements of UW-2(b) relate to special service
restrictions for vessels operating at temperatures below -20'F. There are many other rules for specific
design and construction which take precedence over general rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC83-268
Question: Does a tubesheet over 1/2 in. in thickness welded to the inside of a shell to form a corner
joint as shown in Fig. UG-34 sketch (f) require examination in accordance with the requirements of UG-
93(d)(3)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Appendix 9
File: BC83-246
Question: Is it the intent of Fig. 9-5 sketch (a) in Section VIII, Division 1, that the dimensions of
Type 2 and 4 jackets be the same as Type 1 jackets except for the indicated weld sizes?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Weld Metal Strength in Design
File-. BC81-576
Question (1): Excluding special provisions such as Note (3) in Table UHT-23 of Section VIII, Division
1, are there any supplemental requirements for a pressure vessel designed and constructed according to
Section VIII, Division 1 or 2, when the weld metal of any joint, or attachment, is of lower minimum
specified tensile strength than the base metal?
Reply (1): No. However, the provisions of QW-100. 1 of Section IX shall be satisfied.
Question (2): Section IX, QW-153.1(c), permits the tensile strength of the tension test specimen to be
not less than the specified minimum tensile strength of the weld metal when the applicable section
provides for the use of weld metal having lower room temperature strength than the base metal. Does
Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, provide for the use of weld metal having lower room temperature
strength than the base metal?
Reply (2): Yes. As an example, see footnote (3) to Table UHT-23 and footnote (11) to Table AQT-
1.
Question (3): Does the use of weld metal with lower strength than the base metal have to be reported
on the Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Foreword, Material Usage
File: BC81-610
Question: May an ASTM material specification which has been revised from the current version by
ASTM and which has not been adopted by the ASME Committee be used in Section VIII, Division 1
fabrication in lieu of the current SB version?
Reply: No, unless the provisions of the Foreword apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Tables UCS-56.1 and AF-402.2
File: BC82-736
Question: In using the alternate PWHT requirements of Tables UCS-56.1 and AF-402.2 of Section
VIII, Divisions
1 and 2, respectively, would a P-No. 1 material that is 8 in. thick be held at a minimum temperature of
1050°F for a minimum hold time of 7 hr or 16 hr?
Reply: The requirements of Tables UCS-56.1 and AF-402.2 of Section VIII, Divisions I and 2,
would necessitate a minimum hold time of 16 hr based on 2 hr/in. of thickness when the minimum PWHT
is 1050° F.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Certification of NDE Personnel
File: BC82-754B
Question (1): If a previous employer will not make documented records of qualification, training,
experience of an NDE examiner available, may the hiring company use the individual's documented
personal history, such as a resume, as a basis for experience level in his qualification and certification?
(Same as Vol. 13 pg. 51, 83-85)
Reply (1): Yes, provided the individual is in full compliance with the hiring company's written
practice.
(Same as Vol. 13 PG. 51, 83-85)
Question (2): Is it permissible, for Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 construction, to extend the
certification period of Level III examiners to five years, in accordance with ASNT published policy on
recertification that has not yet been incorporated into SNT-TC-1A?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, do not address NDE personnel recertification; however,
NDE personnel recertification must be addressed to the Manufacturer's Quality Control System
(Appendix 10 and Appendix 18, respectively).
Interpretation- VIII-1-83-167 See Errata on page 584(Interpretation No. 33) '

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; 7-3(a)4)(b), (c), and (d)
File: BC82-830
Question: When examination is in accordance with Article 6 of Section V (see T-660 through T-
680), does the term "indication," referenced in 7-3(a)(4)(b), (c), and (d) of Section VIII, Division 1, mean
the bleed-out size?
Reply: Yes.
Errata
Volume No. 14
Interpretation
VIII-1-83-167 In the Subject and in the second line of the Question, correct 7-3(4)(b) to read 7-
3(a)(4)(b)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-56
File: BC83-084
Question: Under the requirements for postweld heat treatment, will holding a vessel at a
temperature of 1112° F ± 36° F for a minimum period of 2 hr for material 2 in. thick of P-Nos. 1, 3, and 4
meet the provisions of Table UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No, the minimum temperature specified in Table UCS-56 is 1100° F for P-No. 1, P-No.
3, and P-No. 4 materials. UCS-56 permits lower temperatures for postweld heat treatment of P-No. 1 and
P-No. 3 materials only if the requirements of Table UCS-56.1 are met. Lower temperatures are not
permitted for P-No. 4 materials.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; External Pressure Design
File: BC83-113
Question: In Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, when calculating the strength of a helical coil
subjected to external pressure, what Code rules are used to set the external MAWP?
Reply: The present rules in UG-28 and AD-310 are for straight tubes between supports. Any
other configurations, such as helical coils, shall be considered according to U-2(g) for Division 1 and
Appendix 4 for Division 2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116(m); UG-46
File: BC83-208
Question: Is it permissible to consider bolted water box covers fabricated of steel plate, conforming
to a material specification listed in Table UCS-23, and identified per the requirements of UG-93 and UG-
94, to be manhole or handhole covers within the meaning of UG-116(m) of Section VIII, Division 1, and
thus exempt from an additional marking identifying them with the vessel or chamber of which they form
a part?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Radiography Before Forming
File: BC83-212
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, in order to utilize the joint efficiencies listed in
Table UW-12 and UW-12 for full or spot in determining the minimum required thickness of a
torispherical formed head, shall the radiographic examination be carried out before or after the head is
formed?
Reply: The rules in Section VIII, Division 1, do not stipulate when the radiography is to be
performed. Consequently, it may be done before or after the welded segments are formed into a
torispherical head.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCI-35, Fig. 1-6, and UG-32
File: BC83-256
Question: Which formula in UG-32 of Section VIII, Division 1, should be used to determine t for
circular cast iron spherically shaped head with a bolting flange similar to Fig. 1-6 sketch (c)?
Reply: For the Configurations given in Fig. 1-6, the applicable head thickness shall be
determined from the formulas in Appendix 1-6 using the allowable stress from Table UCI-23.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC83-261
Question: An annular ring cut from flat plate is attached to a cylindrical shell with fillet welds
similar to those shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (g) of Section VIII, Division 1. Bolt holes for the purpose
of attaching a flat cover plate are drilled and tapped into the annular ring on a bolt circle center line which
coincides with the midthickness of the shell plate, thereby eliminating bending moments, resulting from
the bolt load, in the annular ring. Do the requirements of UG-93(d)(3) apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-11(a)(1) and AM-105.1(a), Weld Caps Used for
Heads in Pressure Vessels
File: BC83-266
Question (1): UG-11(a)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1, permits the use of pipe fittings, including
welding caps, in accordance with an ASME Standard listed in Table UG-44. If the pipe fittings are
supplied to ANSI B16.9, what method should be used to determine the pressure-temperature rating?
Reply (1): The pressure-temperature ratings for B16..9 fittings shall be calculated as for straight
seamless pipe in accordance with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, including the maximum allowable
stress value for the material. (See Case 1899 where applicable.) The thickness tolerance of B16.9 shall
apply.
Question (2): AM-105.1(a) of Section VIII, Division 2, permits the use of standard pipe fittings,
including welding caps, provided the material is permitted for Division 2. If the pipe fittings are supplied
to ANSI B16.9, what method should be used to determine the pressure-temperature ratings, excluding any
limitation of the rules of AD-150 and AD-160?
Reply (2): The pressure-temperature ratings for B16.9 fittings shall be calculated as for straight
seamless pipe in accordance with the rules of Section VIII, Division 2, including the design stress
intensity value for the material. The thickness tolerance of B16.9 shall apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56(d)(4)
File: BC83-283
Question: Is it necessary to perform postweld heat treatment on a shell-to-nozzle attachment per

UW-16.1 sketch (e), in Section VIII, Division 1, when both materials are P-No. 1 and the shell thickness
is 0,699 and the nozzle wall thickness exceeds 1 1/2 in.?
Reply: No. See UCS-56(d)(4).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Tubesheet Extension Used as a Bolting Flange
File: BC83-285
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, when tubesheets are extended to be used as a bolting flange,
what method should be used to determine the minimum required thickness for the flange?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1, does not contain specific rules for this configuration; therefore,
the rules of U-2(g) apply.
File: BC83-286
Question (1): If two hemispherical spherical heads are welded with a Type 1 joint, what is the
minimum degree of radiographic examination that must be performed to obtain an efficiency of 1.0?
Reply (1): This joint must be fully radiographed for the desired efficiency.
Question (2): Is the joint described in Question (1) a Category A joint?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UNF-19(b)
File: BC83-304
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UNF-19(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, to

weld unalloyed titanium to zirconium?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-37 and Appendix 1
File: BC83-306
Question (1): A heat exchanger floating head is of the type depicted in Fig. 1-6 sketch (d) of
Section VIII, Division 1. When there is a round nozzle opening in the center of the dished plate, what
is the basis of t, as defined in UG-37 for determining required reinforcement?
Reply (1): In this case, tr is the head thickness required by 1-6(g)(1).

Question (2): If the area of reinforcement is within the dished plate section of the floating head, is t,
based on the required thickness of a seamless sphere of the same radius as the dished plate?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-23 and UW-12
File: BC83-311
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, a vessel shell fabricated from ERW pipe is
welded circumferentially to formed heads. The joints are visually examined only. What factors shall be
used in the formulas of UG-27?
Reply: For circumferential stress, the allowable stress from Table UCS-23 is multiplied by 80%,
and E= 1.0 .For the longitudinal stress, the allowable stress from the Table is multiplied by 100%, but E
= 0.7 or 0.65, depending on the joint Type 1 or 2.
Interpretation.- VIII-1-83-181
File: BC83-315
Question: A flat head of the type depicted in Fig. UG-34 sketch (j) or (k) of Section VIII, Division
1, is to have reinforcement as required by UG-39(b). Since the opening in the blind flange is equal to or
less than, half the head diameter, is it appropriate to use Formula (1) from UG-34(c)(2) instead of
Formula (2)?
Reply: No. Formula (2) of UG-34(c)(2) is required for this case.
File: BC83-312
Question: If two seamless formed heads, each with a skirt as described in UG-32 of Section VIII,
Division 1, are welded together with a double welded butt joint, is this joint considered Category A or B?
Reply: The joint described is a Category B joint.
File: BC83-314
Question: What is the acceptable level of reduction in thickness adjacent to a weld in UW-35 of
Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: The acceptable conditions for this reduction in thickness are given in UW-35(a).
File: BC83-328
Question (1): UG-45(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, reads "The wall thickness of a nozzle neck ..."
Does this refer to the minimum wall thickness?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): When applying 13-18(b) or (c), what values of J2, and J3, shall be used when L1, / H or
L1, / h is less than
1 0?
Reply (2): L1/H or L1/h must be at least equal to 1.0 to use the provisions in 13-18(b) or (c).
File: BC83-317
Question: Openings for NPS I through NPS 2 1/2 are used for heater wells and are subjected to
external pressure only. A small portion of these wells (approximately 1/2 in. to 3 in.) extends into the
atmosphere for insertion of heater elements. May these openings be considered access openings when
using the provisions of UG-45 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.

Subject: Section VIII-1, UG-136, UG-11(c), and UW-11, Welding of Pressure Relief Valves
File: BC83-071A
Question (1): UG-136 does not include any specific requirements for welding in the construction of
pressure relief valves. With regard too such welding, do the requirements of UG-11(c) apply?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): With regard to the welding referred to in question (1), if threaded parts are seal welded, is
radiographic examination in accordance with UW-11 required?
Reply (2): No.-
Question (3): With regard to the welding referred to in Question,(1), if parts are welded with butt joints,
is radiographic examination in accordance with UW-11(a) or (b) mandatory?
Reply (3): No.
Note: On November 30, 1983, this Interpretation was withdrawn for further Committee
consideration.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-187 (Withdrawn)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-3, Longitudinal joint with Backing Bar
File: BC79-246
Question (1): A longitudinal baffle is used as a backing strip for a Category A joint in a cylindrical
shell by fitting it to the inside of the vessel against the weld prep where it is used as a backing strip. Is
this joint acceptable and what type is it?
Reply (1): The Code does not cover this type of design and no joint efficiencies are given in Table
UW-12. Therefore, the provisions of U-2(g) or UG-101 apply to Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): A longitudinal baffle is inserted entirely through a Category A joint and attached to the
cylindrical shell on each side of the baffle by full penetration welds. Is this joint acceptable and what type
is it?
Reply (2): Same as Reply (1).
Question (3): A longitudinal baffle is inserted partially into Category A joint and welded into place. Is
this joint acceptable, and what type is it?
Reply (3): Same as Replies (1) and (2).

Note: On December 29, 1983, this Interpretation was withdrawn for further Committee
consideration.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Heat Exchange Tube Qualification, SB-111
File: BC81-443
Question: May SB-111 tubing which is processed into final form by having both doubly enhanced
(externally and internally finned by cold working) and plain sections be used for pressure vessel
applications if the certification of the finished tube is based on an analysis of the weaker plain section and
the design for internal pressure is based on the corresponding maximum allowable stress values for the
weaker material in Subsection C of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UCL-34, AF-551, and AF-552, PWHT of Weld Overlaid
Tubesheets
File: BC81-531
Question (1): Is it required under the provisions of UCL-34 in Section VIII, Division 1, to postweld
heat treat SA-105 tubesheet forgings when weld overload with austenitic stainless steel with 1/8 in.
nominal thickness for the following base metal thicknesses?
(a) 1.42 in.
(b) 0.98 in.
(c) 1.97 in.
Reply(]): No.
Question (2): Is it required under the provisions of AF-551 and AF-552 in Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (2): Requirements for postweld heat treatment of weld metal overlay are not covered in
Division 2 of the Code.
File: BC82-197
Question (1): May wing nuts used for a bolted cover on a pressure vessel built in accordance with
Section VIII, Division 1, be made from malleable iron castings conforming to SA-47 Grade 35018?
Reply (1): No, SA-47 Grade 35018 is not listed in Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (2): May wing nuts used for a bolted cover on a pressure vessel built in accordance with
Section VIII, Division 1, be made from a material listed in Table UCI-23?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-36, Repair of Clad Material, SA-263
File: BC82-221
Question (1): Are the requirements of UCL-36 in Section VIII, Division 1, applicable to repair welding
of clad conforming to SA-263?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): In the event of damage occurring to clad conforming to SA-263, is examination by liquid
penetrant method alone sufficient for the repaired clad using austenitic chromium-nickel steel weld filler
metal or non-air-hardening nickel-chromium-iron weld filler metal?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is the radiographic spot examination requirement specified in UCL-36(b) applicable only
when the weld is in continuous contact with the welds in the base metal?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Can the radiographic spot examination, referred to in UCL-36(b) for lined construction,
be satisfied by other testing methods?
Reply (4): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-34 and PWHT of Weld Overlaid Tubesheets
File: BC82-655
Question (1): Is it required under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-34, to postweld heat
treat as a result of overlaying a P-No. 1 Group No. 2 tubesheet, 15 in. thick, which has one surface
completely weld overlaid with a 5/8 in. thick layer of P-No. 8 composition weld metal?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Same as Question (1), except that the weld overlay is 3/16 in. thick?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Same as Question (1), except that the tubesheet material is P-No. 5 Group No. 1?
Reply (3): Yes. UCS-56 and Table UCS-56 apply, and the minimum holding time is based on the
weld overlay thickness.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-193 (Same as question (1) 83-195 next page)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-9(c), Tapered Transition at Tubesheets
File: BC82-739
Question: A flat plate or tubesheet is welded into the cylindrical portion of a vessel of thinner
thickness such that the plate forms a part of the external pressure boundary. If the opening in the
cylindrical shell satisfies the shape and size limits of UG-36(a) and (b) and the shell reinforcement is
designed in accordance with the rules for openings, does the requirement for a tapered transition between
plates of differing thickness in UW-9(c) apply?
Reply: No. However, if these limits are not satisfied, the provisions of U-2(g) or UG-101 apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-127(a)(3) and UG-132, Safety Valve Rupture Disk
Combination
File: BC82-740
Question: When a rupture disk device and a pressure relief valve are tested in combination in
accordance with the rules of UG-132 in Section VIII, Division 1, may the Combination Capacity Factor
be used with a rupture disk holder and/or rupture disk of a model or series other than that for which it is
tested?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34, UG-36, UG-39, UG-42(e), and UW-9(c)
File: BC83-007
Question (1): A flat plate or tubesheet is welded into the cylindrical portion of a vessel of thinner
thickness such that the plate forms a part of the external pressure boundary. If the opening in the
cylindrical shell satisfies the shape and size limits of UG-36(a) and (b) and the shell reinforcement is
designed in accordance with the rules for openings, does the requirement for tapered transition between
plates of differing thickness in UW-9(c) apply? (Same as 83-193 on previous page)
Reply (1): No. However, if these limits are not satisfied, the provisions of U-2(g) or UG-101 apply.
(Same as 83-193 on previous page)
Question (2): Is it permissible to attach a large opening designed in accordance with the UG-36 through
UG-41 rules for openings with a corner joint configuration?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12 and UW-52 (Void see 83-268)
File: BC83-019
Question: If a Category B, Type 1 head-to-shell weld joint with no radiography, would a

Category A, Type 1 longitudinal weld joint on the same vessel that is spot radiographed in accordance
with UW-11(b) and UW-52 in Section VIII, Division 1 have a maximum allowable joint efficiency of
0.85 as given in Table UW-12?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Restricted Lift Pilot Operated Safety Relief Valves
File: BC83-039
Question: When each combination of size and lift of a type or series of restricted lift pilot operated
safety valves has been capacity certified in accordance with the provisions of UG-131(d)(2) of Section
VIII, Division 1, how many valves must be tested for the subsequent stamped capacity verification
requirements of UG-136(c)(3)(a) and (b) and UG-136(c)(4)(a)
and (b)?
Reply: When a type or series of restricted lift pilot operated safety valves has been originally
certified by conducting tests in accordance with the requirements of UG-131(d)(2) on each size and lift
combination, each subsequent stamped capacity verification test of the type or series as required by UG-
136(c)(3)(a) and (b) and UG-136(c)(4)(a) and (b) may be conducted by testing two valves only, each of
which is of a different size and set at a different pressure and lift restriction. The preceding only applies if
the stamped capacity of the unrestricted type or series is verified as required by UG-136(c)(3)(b), and the
method and/or procedure for restricting the lift is uniform throughout the design.
File: BC83-139
Question: Figure UW-13.1 sketch (a) (left view) of Section VIII, Division 1, depicts a head with
pressure on its concave side inserted into a shell and attached using a single fillet lap weld on the outside
of the vessel. May such a head be attached using a single fillet lap weld on the inside of the vessel?
Reply: No. [See Table UW-12(6)(b).]
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-45, Nozzle Neck Thickness
File: BC83-226
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1, prohibit the use of standard wall pipe for internal and
external pressure when corrosion is specified?
Reply (1): No. To determine the minimum nozzle neck thickness, first a thickness according to UG-
45 is calculated. Then the thicknesses according to UG-45(a)(1) through (4) are calculated and the
smallest of (1) through (4) is noted. The minimum nozzle neck thickness shall be the least that is
determined by UG-45(a), but not less than the smallest determined by UG-45(a)(1) through (4).
Depending upon the calculations, UG-45(a)(4) may control, which states that the thickness shall be
standard wall pipe plus corrosion. This rules out standard wall pipe if UG-45(a)(4) sets the thickness.
Question (2): In Section VIII, Division 1, what are the requirements for establishing the minimum
nozzle neck thickness for a vessel under external pressure only?
Reply (2): The procedure is similar to that given in Question (1) and Reply (1), above. First, a
thickness is calculated according to UG-45(a), which means using external pressure only; the smaller
thickness determined by UG-45(a)(2) and
UG-45(a)(4) is noted. The minimum nozzle neck thickness for external pressure only shall be at least that
determined by
UG-45 and no less than the smaller determined by UG-45(a)(2) and (4).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Physical Properties After Furnace Brazing
File: BC83-408
Question: Are there any provisions in Section VIII, Division 1, regarding the tensile strength or
yield strength requirements for base metals after brazing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, U-1(k)(1) and (2)
File: BC83-420
Question (1): Under the provisions of U-1(k)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, may a pressure vessel
which must otherwise be inspected be exempt from inspection requirements if the volume is limited to 5
cu ft, but the maximum working pressure is allowed to exceed 250 psig?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Under the same provision of the Code, may a like pressure vessel which must otherwise
be inspected be exempt from inspection if the maximum allowed working pressure is limited to 250 psig,
but the volume is allowed to exceed
5 cu ft?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is the following interpretation of Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(k)(1) consistent with the
intent of the Code? Pressure vessels of 5 cu ft or less in volume which do not exceed 250 psig pressure
shall be exempt from inspections, provided they comply in all other respects with the provisions of
Section VIII, Division 1, of the Code.
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Use of Fluoroscopy Instead of Radiography
File: BC83-424
Question: Is it permissible in Section VIII, Division 1, to use fluoroscopy in performing

examination of welds in pipe in lieu of radiography?
Reply: No.
File: BC83-429
Question(1): A head is butt welded to one end of a one-course seamless shell and a tubesheet is
attached by a corner joint at the other end. No radiography is to be performed. Shall the stress valve used
in calculating the shell be reduced to 80% according to the requirements of UW-12(c) in Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would the stress valve (value) in the situation above be reduced to 80% if two shell
courses connected by butt welding were used?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-5(b) and UG-55(a), Welding Requirements
File: BC83-453
Question: Are qualified welding procedures and qualified welders to Section IX required for all
welding done in accordance with UG-55 of Section VIII, Division 1 even when material 3/8 in. thick and
under is used and the provisions of UG-5(b) are followed?
Reply: Yes. UG-55 makes reference only to the material requirements of attachment.
Therefore, other applicable fabrication requirements for welded vessels must also be followed. See UW-
28(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCL-23(b)
File: BC83-461
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UCL-23(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, to
include as part of the base metal thickness calculation the thickness of a low carbon weld overlay which is
0.2 in. thick for girth flanges of SA-105 and SA-350 LF 2 materials?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHT-18 and Code Case 1883
File: BC83-463
Question: For vessels constructed according to Code Case 1883, when the material (for shells or
heads) is 2 in. or less in thickness, is it required that all openings, regardless of size, shall meet the
requirements for reinforcing, nozzle geometry, and nozzle attachments, and shall conform to details
shown in Fig. UHT-18.1 (only)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2(a) and UCL-34(a) and (b)
File: BC83-464
Question: Would a vessel fabricated of carbon steel plate material be required to be postweld heat
treated per UW-2(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, when the inside of the vessel is lined with a corrosion
resisting chromium-nickel stainless steel lining?
Reply: Yes. See UCL-34,
File: BC83-465
Question (1): Under the requirements of UW-14 in Section VIII, Division 1, may an opening which is
inherently reinforced in accordance with UG-36(c)(3) be placed in a weld seam without radiographing the
weld seam or adding additional reinforcement in the form of a pad?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If a small nozzle within the limits of UG-36(c)(3) is placed in a weld seam, the
reinforcement calculations being made to show adequate reinforcement, will this satisfy the requirements
of UW-14(b) without any radiography or additional reinforcement pad?
Reply (2): Only if the reinforcement calculations as described in UG-40 contain a value of E1, from
Table UW-12, column (c); and additionally, if no pad is to be added, any reinforcement which is required
to satisfy the reinforcement requirements comes from additional thickness of the shell and/or nozzle.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(h)(3), Location of Impact Specimens
File: BC83-537
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-84(h)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1, to

take the second set of impact specimens at a location three-fourths of the material thickness, measured
from the same surface the first set of impact specimens was taken from?
Reply: Yes
Errata
Volume 13
Interpretation VIII-1-83-133 Correct Date Issued to read June 21, 1983
SPECIAL NOTICE
SECTION VIII,, DIVISION 1
The following Interpretation should be considered part of Interpretations Volume 1 4.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-210 (Recinded)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13 and Fig. UW-13.2
File: BC78-640 (BC78-640 per Vol. 15 Errata, page 162) Recinded
Question: In a joint configuration for a box header similar to that shown in Fig. UW-13.2(b) or (c),
is it permissible to determine the "a" and "b" dimensions using the line of fusion [as defined in UW-
13(e)(1)] in the welded condition?
Reply: Yes, provided that the procedure and frequency for determining the dimensions using the
fusion line are acceptable to the Authorized Inspector.
Note: This Interpretation should have appeared in Interpretations No. 4, covering

Interpretations issued from
July 1, 1978, through December 31, 1978.
Errata
Volumes 14 and 15
Interpretation
VIII-1-83-210 Correct File to read BC78-640
Recinded
Interpretation VIII-1-83-210, which was published both as a separate insert to Interpretations No. 14 and
on p. 122 of Interpretations Volume No. 15, is hereby rescinded.
File: BC82-756*
Question (1): Are the allowable compressive stresses established in accordance with UG-23(b) of
Section VIII, Division 1, applicable to primary stresses only or to the sum of primary and secondary
stresses (including thermal stress)?
Reply (1): The requirements of UG-23(b) are applicable to primary stresses only.
Question (2): Are there methods in Section VIII, Division 1, to determine the acceptability of a vessel
subject to a combination of axial compressive loading and external pressure?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Welding of Pressure Relief Valves
File: BC83-071 A*
Question: UG-136 does not include any specific requirements for welding in the construction of
pressure relief valves. With regard to such welding, do the requirements of UG-11(c) apply?
Reply: No. See U-1(f).
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-210 (Same as Vol. 9 page 121 & Vol. 14 page 116)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13 and Fig. UW-13.2
File: B78-465 (BC78-640)
Question: In a joint configuration for a box header similar to that shown in Fig. UW-13.2(b) or (c),
is it permissible to determine the "a" and "b" dimensions using the line of fusion [as defined in UW-
13(e)(1)] in the as-welded condition?
Reply: Yes, provided that the procedure and frequency for determining the dimensions using the
fusion line are acceptable to the Authorized Inspector.
Note: This Interpretation should have appeared in Interpretations No. 4, covering

Interpretations issued from
July 1, 1978, through December 31, 1978.
(Interpretation VIII-1-83-210 appeared as a separate insert to VIII-1 Interpretations No. 14 that was
distributed with the Summer 1984 Addenda. It is being included here as a convenience to the reader.)
Recinded
(See Errata to VIII-1-83-210 on p. 162 of Interpretations No. 15.) (This Errata corrects BC No.
to 78-640)
(This Interpretation was rescinded see page 589)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-27(c)(1), UG-76(c), and Fig. UW-16, Required Thickness
of Head and Skirt
File: BC82-417
Question (1): In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, when the allowable stress value of the head is
greater than that of the shell, is it permissible for the thickness of the head skirt to be thinner than that
required of the shell to which it is attached?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2):
(a) When nozzle necks extend inside the vessel shell beyond the limits of reinforcement, are the exposed
edges required to be rounded or chamfered as per UG-76(c) of Section VIII, Division 1?
(b) Do the above requirements of UG-76(c), within the limits given above, apply to pipe, forgings, and/or
plate necks?
(c) Do the requirements of UG-76(c) apply to the exposed shell edge for openings as shown in Fig. UW-
16.1 sketch (bb) and Fig. UW-16.2 sketch (p)
Reply (2)
(a) Yes.
(b) Yes
(c) Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix L, Nozzle Load Paths
File: BC82-882
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 calculations, are nozzle load paths other than those presently
in Appendix L required to be considered?
Reply: No.
File: BC83-075
Question: UG-5(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, specifies that when material not identified in
accordance with UG-93 is used for a nonpressure part, guided bend test per QW-451 of Section IX is
required for each "lot" of all such material over 3/8 in. thick. May the "Material Specification" of such
material be considered as "lot," provided all following conditions are met?
(a) The material to be used for nonpressure parts conforms to a National Standard Material
Specification and is identified with the particular Material Specification Number.
(b) The guided bend test required by UG-5(b) is made for each Material Specification and
material thickness in accordance with the requirements of QW-451 of Section IX, and the test report is
available to the Authorized Inspector.
(c) The identification marking traceable to the Material Test Report is stamped on each part of
such material, and the Material Test Report of such material is available to the Authorized Inspector.
Reply: No. A test must be made for each lot as defined in the Material Specification.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Scope, U-1
File: BC83-127
Question (1): A type of tire retreading equipment holds a rubber tire in metal part(s) which can be
pressurized only when a tire is in place. The tire forms part of the pressure containing boundary. Is this
equipment within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No. However, in accordance with footnote 1 to U-1, the laws or regulations of
jurisdictions should be reviewed to determine requirements which may be different or more restrictive.
Question (2): May the metallic pressure containing part(s) of the equipment described in Question (1)
be constructed as a Section VIII, Division 1 part, including stamping and data reports?
Reply (2): Yes. See U-1(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-32, UG-37, and UG-45
File: BC83-404
Question (1): Does UG-32 of Section VIII, Division 1, apply for formed heads of vessels with pressure
on the concave side?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does UG-37 apply to the required thickness of a formed head when determining the
nozzle neck thickness to the provisions of UG-45(a)(1)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC83-476
Question: For flanges with nut-stops designed to Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, is the g1
dimension defined in 2-12(a)(1) intended to be a maximum limit for g1?
Reply: No.
File: BC83-544
Question: Are threaded couplings welded directly to a pressure vessel to be designed per ANSI
B16.11 as stated in UG-11, footnote 5, Section VIII, Division 1, thus disregarding the requirements of
UG-45 for nozzle neck thicknesses, since no neck exists?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; SA-455 in UCS-23
File: BC83-546
Question: A pressure vessel manufacturer fabricates a head made of SA-455. The required
calculated thickness is 0.375 in. which is based on the allowable stress value for thicknesses up to 0.375
in. Because of thinning allowance, the fabricator has to increase the thickness by a given value and then
orders a plate which is thicker than 0.375 in. Since the ordered thickness is greater than 0.375 in., does
the required calculated thickness have to be based on the allowable stress value given for the thickness
range of 0.375 in. to 0.58 in.?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Attachment Welds at Openings
File: BC83-556
Question (1): Are the nozzle reinforcement details given in UW-16 of Section VIII, Division 1, and
shown in
Fig. UW-16.1 the only details which are permitted?
Reply (1): No. The title of Fig. UW-16.1 states "some acceptable types."
Question (2): Are the nozzle design rules applicable to nozzle configurations which are perpendicular
to the shell or head surface only, or may they be used for nozzles at other angles such as "hillside" and
other nonperpendicular constructions?
Reply (2): There is no limitation on the angle of the nozzle axis to the shell or head surface in the
nozzle reinforcement rules of Section VIII, Division 1. When no specific rules are given, the requirements
of U-2(g) apply,
File: BC83-557
Question (1): For vessels of small diameter, not accessible for welding from the inside, as well as for
vessels of large diameter where welding from the inside is possible, it is proposed to weld both the
longitudinal and circumferential seams with single side full penetration welds. TIG and SMAW or TIC;
and SAW processes with argon backing for the root run will be used. May these be considered to be
Type 1 joints in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Will the degree of examination affect the determination of the type of joints?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 4
File: BC83-578
Question: 4-3 in Section VIII, Division 1, gives formulas for the maximum size of rounded
indications. If the maximum size of an acceptable rounded indication calculated from this paragraph
differs from the examples in Table 4-1 or the measured sizes in Figs. 4-1 through 4-8, which size shall be
used?
Reply: The formulas shown in 4-3 shall take precedence.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2, UG-84, and UHA-51
File: BC83-580
Question (1): Are weld metal impact tests for each welding procedure used, made in accordance with
UG-84(h) and tested at a temperature at least as low as the minimum design temperature of the vessel,
required for vessels made of Type 304 or 304L materials?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are weld metal impact tests for each procedure used and vessel production impact test of
the welds [in accordance with UG-84(i)] required for vessels made of Type 316 (or all other UHA-23
materials except Type 304 or 304L) materials?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are Category C and D welds in vessels made of Type 304 or 304L material required by
UW-2(b)(3) and(4) to be full penetration welds?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Are Category C and D welds in vessels made of Type 316 materials (or all other UHA-23
materials) required by UW-2(b)(3) and (4) to be full penetration welds?
Reply (4): Yes.
File: BC83-582
Question: May SA-515 Gr. 70 (without any supplementary requirements) be used for making
dished heads by cold spinning and then heat treating after welding to the shell?
Reply: Yes.
Subject-. Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79, UG-79, and UHT-79
File: BC83-586
Question (1): Do the provisions of UCS-79 in Section VIII, Division 1, apply to cold spinning?
Reply (1): Yes. Also see UG-79.
Question (2): When cold spinning to UCS-79, do the heads have to be normalized?
Reply (2): Normalizing is not specifically required, but the provisions of UG-79 and UHT-79 apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-39, Flat Head with Opening
File: BC79-323
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, may the formulas in 2-13 for reverse flanges be applied to
configurations where the K value, that is, the ratio of the outside diameter of the flange to the inside
diameter of the flange, is greater than 2.0?
Reply: Yes. See 2-13(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Use of SA-234 Fittings
File: BC81-301
Question: May either SA-516-70 or SA-515-70 be used in the fabrication of caps in accordance
with SA-234 or A 234 for applications in Section VIII, Division 1 construction operating at a design
temperature of 20'F to 650°F?
Reply:: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-85(b) and (e)
File: BC82-563
Question (1): A dished head made of P-No. 1 Gr. Nos. 1 and 2 material with a thickness of less than 1
1/4 in. is hot pressed at a temperature of 1750°F. Are test specimens required under UCS-85 of Section
VIII, Division 1, to establish the mechanical property of the material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the head described in Question (1) is welded to the shell and then postweld heat treated
at 1150°F, are additional test specimens simulating the postweld heat treatment required?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-25, UG-25, and Appendix E, Use of Corrosion Allowance
for Boiler Economizers
File: BC82-824
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, is it a requirement to have a corrosion allowance

added to the minimum required thicknesses of a boiler economizer fabricated to the rules of this Division?
Reply: Yes, if UCS-25 applies. Also see UG-25 and Appendix E.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(b)(9) and UG-96(a), Certification of Formed Heads
File: BC83-024
Question: If a Manufacturer of formed heads certifies that the forming tolerances of UG-81 of
Section VIII, Division 1, are met, does such certification satisfy the requirements of UG-90(b)(9) and
UG-96(a)?
Reply: Yes, unless the vessel Manufacturer or the Inspector considers that verification is
appropriate.
File: BC83-110 and BC83-298
Question(1): Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 13, apply to the design of a
noncircular pressure vessel as shown in Fig. 13-2(a) sketch 4 if the reinforcement consists of channel
sections, the legs of which are welded to the noncircular shell?
Reply (1): Yes,
Question (2): In the case described in Question (1), do the rules of Appendix 13 apply if the inverted
channel sections are used to contain fluid or vapor and serve as partial jackets?
Reply (2): No. The rules of Appendix 13 do not apply to jacketed vessels, and the rules of Appendix
9 do not apply to noncircular vessels.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(5)(b)
File: BC83-235
Question: Is it permissible to partially radiograph Category B butt welds in a shell section designed
under the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, when the material is SA-612 and
the thickness is 5/8 in. or less?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-43(f)
File: BC83-355
Question: Does UG-43(f) of Section VIII, Division 1, for expanded connections apply to multiple
tubes expanded into tubesheets in shell and tube heat exchangers?
Reply: No.
File: BC83-356
Question: A cylindrical jacketed vessel has a continuous spiral baffle welded around the outside
surface of the inner shell. The spiral baffle is designed as a stiffening ring. Is it permissible to consider
the baffle pitch as a design length of the inner shell section (L) when calculating the shell thickness under
external pressure in UG-28?
Reply: No. Spiral stiffening rings are not specifically covered in Section VIII, Division 1, and
the designer is referred to U-2(g) or UG-101.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix A, Fig. A-2, Tensile Strength of Weld
File: BC83-534
Question: Is the tube-to-tubesheet weld joint shown in Appendix A, Fig. A-2 sketch (6), to be
considered only for seal welding?
Reply.: Yes.
Interpretation: ` VIII-1-83-235
Date issued: May 31, 1984
File: BC83-590
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. 2-4 sketch (la), the rule is that t1 (tn,. Is tn, the nominal
thickness or the minimum required thickness?
Reply: tn, is the nominal thickness of the shell or nozzle wall to which the flange is attached, less
corrosion allowance. Therefore, the nominal thickness of the flange shall be equal to or greater than the
nominal thickness of the shell or nozzle to which it is attached, less corrosion allowance.
File: BC83-597
Question (1): A conical shell reducer section has a cone connected to a cylindrical section. The center
line of the conical section is at an angle to the center line of the cylindrical section. In this case, is angle a
in UG-36(g) of Section VIII, Division 1, to be the angle the center lines make with each other or the
largest included angle between the cone and cylinder sections?
Reply (1): Angle a shall be taken as the largest included angle between the cone and cylinder
sections.
Question (2): Does an oblique conical shell section under internal pressure with an angle a greater than
30 deg. meet the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No. See UG-36(g)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56 and Code Case 1177-7
File: BC83-598
Question(1): Are the requirements of Table UCS-56 applicable to the bellows element to ring elements
attachment welds?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the requirements of Table UCS-56 applicable to ring element attachment welds
which do not have a pressure retaining function?
Reply (2): Postweld heat treatment is required when a nonpressure part is welded to a pressure part
as described in UCS-56(c).
Question (3): If the Manufacturer, with the acceptance of the inspector, shows that heat treatment is
injurious to the design and serviceability of the bellows element, is it permissible to use the provisions of
U-2(g) in lieu of the postweld heat treatment requirements in Table UCS-56?
Reply (3): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix L and UG-37(b)
File: BC83-599
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, two different equations are given for determining the area
required A for reinforcement calculations. One is given in UG-37(b) and the other is given in Fig. L-7 of
Appendix L. Which shall be used?
Reply: The equation given in UG-37(b) is mandatory. However, there are additional rules in
UG-41(a) which require that different strengths of materials be considered. The equation in Appendix L
has incorporated these differences in materials strengths into the basic equation.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Strength of Connection Elements for Category D Joints in a
Shell or Head
File: BC83-600
Question: A nozzle connection is seamless and does not pass through any weld seam in the shell or
head. Is it permissible to use the full allowable stress for the design temperature, as given in the
applicable Tables in Subsection C, when calculating both the load carried by the welds and the unit
stresses? The applicable stress factors in UG-45(c) and UW-15(b) are taken into account.
Reply: Full allowable stresses are permitted for nozzle calculations except for those nozzles
located in a vessel that has been designed according to UG-12(c),(? UW-12(c)) where an 80% factor shall
be applied to allowable stresses.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-37(b) and UG-40(d)
File: BC83-602
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, in nozzle reinforcement calculations in UG-37(b), the

thickness is taken to be "seamless." Does this apply to ERW tubes?
Reply: Yes, provided the allowable stress for ERW pipe or tube is used. See Note (27) to Table
UCS-23.
File: BC83-603A
Question: May a Real Time Radiography System (filmless radiography system) be used under the
provisions of UW-51 and UW-52 in Section VIII, Division 1, in lieu of film type radiography?
Reply: No.
File: BC83-604
Question (1): Is there a need for a stress reduction factor on the allowable stress when calculating the
required thickness of a heat exchanger seamless shell (E= 1.0) attached to flanges of both ends, as shown
in Fig. 2-4 sketches (8), (8a), (8b), and (9)? No radiography is performed.
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is there a need for a stress reduction factor on the allowable stress when calculating the
required thickness of a heat exchanger seamless shell (E = 1.0) that does not contain any Category A or B
joints, but is strictly fabricated with Category C and D non-X-rayable joints?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-125(e) and UG-102, Mounting of Pressure Gages
File: BC83-633
Question (1): Concerning test gages, UG-102(a) in Section VIII, Division 1, reads, "An indicating gage
shall be connected directly to the vessel." Is it acceptable for a pressure gage to be mounted on a tee
which is directly mounted to the pressure vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): UG-125(e) covers indicating pressure gages, if provided, to determine vessel pressure as
it relates to relief device setting. Does the Code contain rules for the mounting or location of such gages?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-36 and Interpretation VIII-79-73
File: BC83-638
Question(1): Does the opening formed by the attachment of a 2 in. long weld neck flange to a shell
require reinforcement?
Reply (1): The opening formed by the attachment of 2 in. long weld neck flange does not require
additional reinforcement other than that inherent in the construction if all of the requirements of UG-
36(c)(3) are met; that is, single opening, not subject to rapid fluctuations in pressure.
Question (2): Interpretation VIII-79-73 refers to UG-36(c)(3)(a) and mentions the word "opening." Is
this term meant to refer to the finished opening in the vessel, such as the inside diameter of a nozzle?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): With regard to UG-36 and the Interpretation mentioned in Question (2), would a 2 in. 600
lb. long weld neck nozzle inserted into a vessel, not subject to rapid fluctuation in pressure, with a shell
thickness greater than 3/8 in., be classified as an opening requiring reinforcement?
Reply (3): The opening formed by the attachment of a 2 in. 600 lb. long weld neck flange does not
require additional reinforcement other than that inherent in the construction if all of the requirements of
UG-36(c)(3) are met; that is, single opening, not subject to rapid fluctuations in pressure.
Question (4): With regard to UG-36 and the Interpretation mentioned in Question 2, would a 2 in.
Schedule 160 pipe inserted into a vessel, not subject to rapid fluctuation in pressure, with a shell thickness
greater than 3/8 in., be classified as an opening requiring reinforcement?
Reply (4): The opening formed by the insertion of a 2 in. Schedule 160 pipe into a shell of a
thickness greater than 3/8 in. does not require additional reinforcement other than that inherent in the
construction if all of the requirements of UG-36(c)(3) are met; that is, single opening, not subject to rapid
fluctuations in pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-101(m), Sm
File: BC83-642
Question(1): What is the definition of Sm in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Sm is defined in UG-101(m)(2) as follows: "Sm = maximum tensile strength of range of
specification."
Question (2): How is Sm derived for use in the equation in UG-101(m)(2)(a)?

Reply (2): Sm is to be taken from the specific material's specification given in Section I1. If no
value of Sm is given in the material specification in Section I1, it is necessary to get the value of Sa by
tests.
File: BC83-643
Question(1): In Section VIII, Division 1, what is the weld joint category of two hemispherical heads
with short skirts which are welded together?
Reply (1): The skirts shall meet the requirements of UG-32(l) which states that the skirt thickness
shall be at least that required for a seamless shell of the same diameter. Therefore, effectively, two shells
are being welded together, and the weld joint is Category B.
Question (2): What radiographic examination is required for the joint described in Question (1) to use E
= 1.0?
Reply (2): Unless there are special service restrictions, the weld joint is treated as any other
Category B joint and requires full radiography or partial radiography to assume E = 1.0.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(c)(6), 120 gal Water Exclusion
File: BC83-648
Question: Does U-1(c)(6) define vessels with a nominal water containing capacity of 120 gal or less
for containing water, with no limitation on pressure, as being outside the scope of Section VIII, Division
1?
Reply: Yes; however, the laws or regulations of jurisdictions should be reviewed for size or
service limitations which may be different. See footnote 1 to U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-52(c), Retention of Spot Radiographic Record
File: BC83-649
Question: The third line of UW-52(c) in Section VIII, Division 1, reads: "Spot radiographs may be
retained or be discarded by the manufacturer after acceptance of the vessel by the inspector." May reader
sheets which document the interpretation of spot radiographs also be discarded?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC83-650
Question: UG-119(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, requires all required markings for nameplates to
be produced by casting, etching, embossing, debossing, stamping, or engraving. If these requirements are
satisfied, may the nameplate have a painted background with unpainted boxes for the required marking?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-42, AF-229.1, and Article T
File: BC83-652A
Question (1): AT-202(a) has the requirement that welding procedure impact tests shall be made on all
high-alloy steel weld metal. Does this include corrosion resistant weld overlays?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is Article T-2 applicable at all design temperatures in Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): AT-202(a) has the requirement that welding procedure impact tests shall be made when
the base material is selected from Groups IV and V of Fig. AM-218.1. Is this applicable for all design
temperatures in Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (3): See Question (2) and Reply (2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-119(c)(1), Size of Characters
File: BC83-661
Question: UG-119(c)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, states: "The required markings on a nameplate
shall be in characters not less than 5/32 in. high. . ." Does this requirement pertain only to the required
markings, and may supplemental data be of smaller size?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC83-662
Question (1): A vessel has a cross section similar to that shown in Fig. 13-2(c) of Section VIII,
Division 1. If the vessel's central dividing plate is off center, is Appendix 13 applicable to the design of
the vessel?
Reply (1): For situations not specifically covered in Section VIII, Division 1, the provisions in 13-
1(c) are applicable.
Question (2): Two connected chambers operate at different pressures. One has a vacuum while the
other has an internal pressure above 15 psig. Is this configuration outside the rules of Appendix 13?
Reply (2): Yes, but it is not outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1. See UG-19.
Question (3): Two connected chambers operate at maximum pressures of 48 psia and 18.6 psia. The
stamping on the vessel is for "vac & 50#." Would operating one side at 0.5 psia and the other at 50 psig
be considered an abnormal operating condition?
Reply y (3): No; however, see UG-19.
Question (4): May the design differential pressure between two connected chambers be in excess of the
maximum allowable working pressure of the vessel?
Reply (4): No. For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, each chamber shall be treated as an
individual vessel unless there is a special provision that ties the pressures of the individual chambers to
each other. See UG-19 and UG-21.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Use of SA-179 and SA-214 for Low Temperature Services
File: BC83-663
Question: May SA-179 tube, SA-214 tube, and SA-285 Grade C plate be used in pressure vessels
operating at a temperature of -100°F and built to Section VIII, Division 1, if the minimum required
thickness meets the provisions of UCS-66(c)(2)(b)?
Subject: Section VIII; Division 1, UW-12(c), Reference to Design Calculations
File: BC83-664
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(c) states that for vessels which are not to be
radiographed, a value of E is taken from column (c) of 'Table UW-12 "provided that in all other design
calculations...." What is meant by "other design calculations”?
Reply: "Other design calculations" means all calculations which are required to satisfy the
loadings in UG-22 except those calculations which use a joint efficiency from column (c) of Table UW-
12 or are exempt as defined in UW-12(c), such as flat heads, etc. For example, in a seamless cylindrical
shell, since there is no weld joint, E =1.0. However, the value of S to be used in calculations shall be 0.8
times the value of allowable stress from the Tables in Subsection C.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions I and 2, UW-39 and AF-234, Peening
File: BC83-683
Question (1): UW-39 in Section VIII, Division 1, and AF-234 in Section VIII, Division 2, have the
words "peening“ and "controlled peening," respectively. Do "peening" and "controlled peening" refer to
only hammer peening or to all peening (hammer, shot, rotary flap, etc.)?
Reply (1): Peening in the Code is meant to apply to only that accomplished by blows from either
manual, electric, or air driven hammers. It is not meant to apply to such fabricating practices as shotblast,
rotary wire wheels, and/or flapper wheels.
Question (2) : What are the controls implied in "controlled peening" in AF-234 of Section VIII,
Division 2?
Reply (2): The Code does not establish technique and/or controls for peening. Peening is not a
science, but an art that is developed by experienced craftsmen.
Question (3): Does "weld metal," in the paragraphs given in Question (1), refer only to the metal added
by welding?
Reply (3): Weld metal is defined in Section IX, QW-492, as that portion of a weld which has been
melted during welding.
Question (4): Is it permissible to peen the heat affected zone and sections of the base metal?
Reply (4): The Code does not prohibit the peening from being carried into the heat affected zone.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Nonmetallic View Ports
File: BC84-030
Question: May nonmetallic view ports be used in Section VIII, Division 1 and 2 pressure vessels?
Reply: Yes. See U-1(e)(1)(d)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Nonmetallic View Ports
File: BC84-030
Question: Are nonmetallic components attached to the first sealing surface of a vessel as referenced
in U-1(e)(4) and AC-120(d) outside the scope of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-44, Pressure Rating of Short Radius Elbows and Returns
File: BC84-032
Question: Does the Note in UG-44 pertain only to subparagraph (g), or does it apply to all
subparagraphs of UG-44 preceding the Note?
Reply: The Note applies only to UG-44(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(k), Quick Actuating Closure
File: BC84-033
Question: What is the definition of "quick actuating closures" in U-1(k) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: See UG-35(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1
File: BC84-050
Question (1): A pressure vessel has an inside diameter, width, height, or cross section diagonal of less
than 6 in. and a length greater than 6 in. Is this vessel outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1, as
given in U-1(c)(9)?
Reply (1): Yes. See footnote 1 to U-1.
Question (2): Are pressure vessels having a volume of less than 5 cu ft and a pressure under 250 psi
outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1, in accordance with U-1(k)?
Reply (2): No. U-1(k) gives some exemptions from inspection by inspectors (as defined in UG-91)
but does not exclude vessels from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (3): Form U-3 of Appendix W for UM vessels does not provide for two chamber vessels nor
an entry for tubesheets. When completing Form U-3 for a two compartment vessel or for a vessel with a
tubesheet, should the additional data be recorded either under "Remarks" or on Form U-4 using Form U-1
as a guide?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC84-051
Question: A forged vessel has a seamless shell and two bolted flat heads. Under the provisions of
UG-99(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, may the ratio (S test temperatures/S design temperature) for the
bolting material be used if it results in the lowest ratio for the material of which the vessel is constructed?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-16(d) and UG-40
File: BC84-052
Question: For reinforcement calculations in Section VIII, Division 1, when pipe used is as the shell
or nozzle, should t or tn as described in UG-40 be calculated as the minimum wall thickness of the pipe
rather than the nominal wall thickness because of the provisions in UG-16(d), Pipe Undertolerance?
Reply: Minimum thickness is used in all reinforcement calculations except for calculating the
available area for reinforcement in the nozzle wall where nominal thickness (with no reduction for
undertolerance) is used.
File-. BC84-053
Question: Do the radiographic requirements of UW-14(b) apply to a 6 in. pad type connection
which is located in a circumferential seam and which fully meets the reinforcement requirements of UG-
37?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(h)(3), Impact Specimens
File: BC84-057
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-84(h)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1, to

take the second set of impact specimens at a location of one-half the material thickness, measured from
the same surface from which the first set of impact specimens was taken?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-46(f)(2), Plugging of Inspection Openings
File: BC84-071
Question: UG-46(f)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1, stipulates that a vessel which requires access or
inspection openings and has an inside diameter of 18 to 36 in., inclusive, is to have a manhole or two
handholes or two threaded pipe plug inspection openings of not less than 2 in. pipe size. Is it the
responsibility of the vessel Manufacturer to provide the closing plugs if the threaded pipe plug inspection
openings are used?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UW-12
File: BC84-087
Question: To meet the requirements of Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1, for a joint
efficiency of 1.00, may a single bevel butt joint with the root pass made with SMAW, GTAW, or
GMAW, and the rest made by SMAW or SAW with 100% radiograph be used?
Reply: Yes. See UW-37(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix W, Form U-1A and Form U-4
File: BC84-089
Question: Item 10 Form U-1A in Appendix W is for nozzles and inspection and safety valve
openings. Is it required that all nozzle openings in a pressure vessel be listed, thus possibly necessitating
the use of Form U-4, the Manufacturer's Data Report Supplementary Sheet?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UW-12, Joint Types
File: BC84-090
Question: A circumferential joint of greater than 24 in. 0. D. is made with a single-welded full
penetration butt weld. Is this a Type No. (1) joint as given in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements in UW-35 and UW-37(d) are met.
File: BC84-102
Question: If a Category B, Type 1 head to shell weld joint is completed with no radiography by one
welder, would a Category A, Type 1 longitudinal weld joint on the same vessel that is spot radiographed
in accordance with UW-11(b) and UW-52 of Section VIII, Division 1, have a maximum allowable joint
efficiency of 0.85 as given in Table UW-12 if it is made by a different welder?
Reply: No. See UW-52.
Note: This Interpretation corrects VIII-1-83-196 of Interpretations No. 14, Section VIII-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116(c), Vessel Markings
File: BC84-105
Question (1): Is it required under UG-116(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, that the letters "S-W" be
applied under the Code symbol for a vessel constructed of a welded cylindrical shell with one or more of
the following seamless welded on parts?
(a) seamless torispherical heads;
(b) seamless flat heads or tubesheets;
(c) seamless pipe nozzle connections.
Reply (1):
(a) Yes.
(b) Yes.
(c) N o.
Question (2): Is it required that the letters "S-W-RES" be applied under the Code symbol for a vessel
constructed of a welded cylindrical shell, seamless flat tubesheets, and ERW pipe nozzles?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it required under UG-11(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, that the letters "W-B" be
applied under the Code symbol for a vessel constructed of a welded cylindrical shell of 12 in. diameter or
larger, with welded pipe nozzles and one
1 1/8 in. diameter copper tube that extends through the shell (to form both an internal pressure boundary
and an external nozzle) and is brazed to a fitting attached to the shell at two places?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-66(c)(2)(b), Low Temperature Service
File: BC84-106
Question (1): For P-No. 1 materials, is there a lower limit to the design temperature below which UCS-
66(c)(b) does not apply?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UCS-66(c)(2)(b) apply to SA-312?
Reply (2): No. See UCS-5(a)

.
Question (3): When designing for low temperature service, using UCS-66(c)(2)(b), may the allowable
stress values given in Table UCS-23 and Table UHA-23 for -20 to -650°F, and -20 to 100°F, respectively,
be used?
Reply (3): UCS-66(c)(2)(b) does not apply to Table UHA-23. The values in UCS-23 for -20 to
650°F may be used. See UCS-67(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-57, SA-612
File: BC84-113
Question: Does Table UCS-57 of Section VIII, Division 1, apply to SA-612 (P-No. 10C, Gr. No.
1)?
Reply: No. See UW-11 for the present radiography requirements for this material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11, Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (a), and UW-51
File: BC84-116
Question (1): Is a nozzle to shell weld (Category D) as illustrated in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (a)
considered a butt joint, and if the nozzle is over 10 in. in diameter, does this joint require radiography if
the design of the vessel dictates radiography of butt joints?
Reply (1): No. Figure UW-16.1 sketch (a) illustrates a full penetration corner joint, not a butt joint
as defined in the Code.
Question (2): Is a flange to nozzle or flange to shell weld (Category C) as illustrated in Fig. UW-13.3
(UW-13.2) sketch (m) considered a butt joint, and if the nozzle and/or shell exceeds 10 in. in diameter,
does this joint require radiography if the design of the vessel is dictated by radiography of butt joints?
Reply (2): No. Figure UW-13.3 (UW-13.2) sketch (m) illustrates a full penetration corner joint and
not a butt joint as defined by the Code.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-75(c), (UW-35(c) Small Diameter Tubes and Pipes
File: BC84-118
Question: Do the provisions of UW-35(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, apply to the inside surfaces
of circumferential single welded butt joints in small diameter tubes and pipes such as those used in heat
exchangers?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII-1, Fig. UW-16.1
File: BC84-128
Question: Is it permissible to attach screwed connections of the type shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch
(y-1) or (z-1) to SA-517-E plate that is less than 2 in. in thickness using the weld joint configuration
shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch
(y-1) or (z-1)?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Fig. UW-16.1
File: BC84-129
Question: With regard to Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (k) in Section VIII, Division 1, if the nozzle neck is
not inserted into the shell but meets it corner to corner, making the dimension between fillet roots equal to
zero, is this joint acceptable?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(c)(6), Impact Testing
File: BC84-131
Question: With reference to UG-84(c)(6) of Section VIII, Division 1, if a material fails the first
impact test but is then reheated above its critical temperature before a second set of tests, should the
second set of tests be run as a retest (where all values must equal or exceed the required average value) or
as a test on new material (where the average of these values must equal or exceed the required average)?
Reply: The test shall be considered a first test of the new material.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-40(d)(3) and UW-16(b), Nozzle Fillet Welds
File: BC84-142
Question: If there is sufficient reinforcement available in the shell and nozzle cylinders, do UG-
40(d)(3) and UW-16(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, require an external fillet weld?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-136(c)(3)(b), Safety Valve Certification
File: BC82-860
Question: Do the words "After ... adjustment" appearing in Section VIII, Division 1, UG-
136(c)(3)(b), allow the manufacturer to adjust the valve's set pressure should it fail to meet the applicable
tolerance during 5 yr recertification testing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHA-51, Impact Testing of 316L Stainless Steel
File: BC83-318
Question (1): Must SA-240-316L plate used for pressure vessel fabrication for a design temperature of
-60°F be impact tested?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Must the PQR for the WPS utilizing E316L weld filler material for this vessel include
impact testing?
Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Are production impact tests of welds noted in UHA-51(b)(5) required for this
application?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-136(a)(7), Seals for Relief Valves
File: BC83-591
Question: Does a safety relief valve designed and manufactured to be nonadjustable after
manufacture, utilizing welding or a locking pin to prevent subsequent adjustment, require a seal?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 14, Requalification of Weld Procedure
File: BC84-135
Question: Is it required under 14-10.7(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, that an additional proof test be
made if any essential variable in the weld procedure originally qualified is changed?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(e)(1), Materials for External Piping
File: BC84-137
Question: U-I(e)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1, defines the geometrical scope of a pressure vessel
in relation to external piping. May such external piping be a material not permitted by the rules of
Division 1?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 1-8 and UG-36(a), Design Requirements
File: BC84-139
Question: May 1-8 of Section VIII, Division 1, be used to calculate the reinforcement of a conical
shell reducer section under external pressure which has been flared to provide a reverse curve reducer as
shown in Fig. UG-36 sketch (c)?
Reply: Reducers under external pressure shall follow the rules of UG-33(f) and 1-8 where
applicable. For those elements for which there are no rules, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be followed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-41, UG-44, and UW-15, Socket Weld Flanges
File: BC84-140
Question (1) Does UG-44 permit the use of socket weld flanges attached to nozzles?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the criteria of UW-15 and UG-41 applicable in the calculation of the attachment fillet
weld size with the nozzle thickness being substituted for the vessel wall thickness in UG-41(b)(2)?
Reply (2): The criteria in UW-15 and UG-41 are for nozzle-to-shell reinforcement calculations, not
for flanges attached to nozzles.
Question (3): Does UW-16(f)(3)(a) apply to socket weld flanges not exceeding 3 in. pipe size?
Reply (3): No. UW-16(f) applies to fittings attached to shells in a manner similar to nozzles attached
to shells.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-16(b), UG-37(b), and Appendix 1
File: BC84-141
Question: In computing nozzle reinforcement for nozzles in 2:1 elliptical heads and other heads and
shell sections in UG-37(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, if the minimum thickness computed by Eq. (1) of
1-4 is less than 1/16 in. as given in UG-16(b), should the minimum value determined in 1-4 or the 1/16 in.
thickness be used in nozzle thickness calculations?
Reply: The 1/16 in. minimum thickness which is listed in UG-16(b) is the minimum nominal
thickness of the actual plate. It would be used in nozzle reinforcement calculations as the actual thickness.
The minimum required thickness, tr or trn is based on the appropriate formula for determining the shell,
head, or nozzle minimum required thickness and could be less than 1/16 in.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34, UG-39(c), and Appendix 14, 14-20, Openings in a
Rectangular Flat Cover
File: BC84-153
Question: Is the calculation procedure of Appendix 14, 14-20, directly applicable to openings in
rectangular flat cover?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-99(d)
File: BC84-154
Question (1): In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, when hydrostatic test pressure is used to
compute the thickness of a shell, is it the intent of UG-99(d) to take the yield strength as maximum
allowable value in order to have no visible permanent distortion?
Reply (1): UG-99 gives the hydrostatic test requirements for a vessel which has had the thickness set
by formulas given elsewhere in the Code, such as UG-27, UG-28, UG-32, and UG-33. It is not used to
compute the thickness of the shell.
Question (2): In Eqs. (1a), (1b), (1c), and (1d) of 13-8(d) of Section VIII, Division 1, if the pressure is
the test pressure, is it permissible to take the yield strength for the allowable stress?
Reply (2): No. The rules that are given in Appendix 13 are for design conditions only. The
allowable stresses that are given are for that condition only. If the designer wants to use some of the
procedures for some other calculations, that is the designer's responsibility according to U-2(g).
Question (3): In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, is it permissible to use UCL-23(c) for carbon
steel SA-515 Grade 60, integrally clad with copper nickel Alloy 706, when the joints are completed by
depositing corrosion resisting weld metal over the weld in the base plate?
Reply (3): No.
File: BC84-157
Question (1): Does a partial jacket resembling Fig. 9-5 sketch (k) fall within the category of a Type
jacketed vessel as shown in Fig. 9-2 for the purpose of calculations?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Regarding 9-7(b)(2), does a partial jacket failing within the scope of a continuous jacket
meet Code requirements without calculations if it is proof tested in accordance with UG-101(p)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Regarding 9-5(b), in the case of a conical head with jacket, are distances Rs and Rj to be
measured perpendicular to the axis of the conical head or perpendicular to the wall of the conical head?
Reply (3): Rs and Rj are measured perpendicular to the axis of the conical head.
Question (4): Can a flat closure bar for a jacket similar to Fig. 9-5 sketch (d-1) be considered a flat
head for the purpose of calculations in lieu of the formulas for trc given in Appendix 9?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Is a full penetration weld connecting a closure bar to the vessel wall permissible in place
of two fillet welds as shown in Fig. 9-5 sketch (f-1)?
Reply (5): No.
File: BC84-158
Question: Do the rules of 13-7(b) per Fig. 13-2(a) sketch (2) apply to a formed channel with flat end
plates when attached by full penetration welds to the exterior of a pressure vessel cone operating at the
same working pressure as the channel attachment?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12 and UG-37(b)(4), Stress Reduction Factor for Seamless
Shell
File: BC84-174
Question (1): If a vessel is fabricated without butt welded joints, using a shell of seamless or ERW pipe
and having end heads in accordance with Fig. UG-34 sketch (e), (f), or (g), and/or flanged per Fig. 2-4
sketch (3), (4), (8), (8a), (8b), or (9), so that no radiography is required, is there a need for a stress
reduction factor to be applied to the allowable stress values prescribed for the material in Subsection C?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In reinforcement calculations, when both ends of the seamless or type ERW shell are
attached as described above and no radiography is required or performed, is there a need for a stress
reduction factor to be applied to the allowable stress from Subsection C for the shell and the nozzle
attached to the shell?
Reply (2): No
Question (3): Does UG-37(b)(4) apply to a vessel fabricated per Question (2) above?
Reply (3): No.
File: BC84-191
Question: For vessels of small diameter, not accessible for welding from inside, as well as for
vessels of large diameters where welding from inside is possible, it is proposed to weld both longitudinal
and circumferential seams with single side full penetration welds. GTAW, GMAW, SMAW, and SAW
processes with fiberglass tape backing for the root run will be used. May these be considered to be Type
No. (1) joints as described in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13(g)(1), Requirements of Tension Test Specimen
File: BC84-192
Question: Is a reverse flange designed per 2-13 and used as an end closure for a pressure vessel
exempt from the requirements of UW-13(g)(1)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11, and UCS-85, Low Alloy Tubes and Pipes
File: BC84-193
Question(1): May low alloy steel pipes procured in other than annealed condition in accordance with
an ASME Section II Specification and used as nozzle pipes on low alloy steel equipment be exempted
from the requirements of UCS-85(b)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May low alloy steel pipes procured in other than annealed condition in accordance with
an ASME Section II Specification in standard lengths and used as heat exchanger tubes in low alloy steel
equipment be exempted from the requirements of UCS-85(b)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May low alloy steel tubes procured in other than annealed condition in accordance with
an ASME Section II Specification in standard lengths and used as heat exchanger tubes in low alloy steel
equipment be exempted from the requirements of UCS-85(b)?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-2(b) and UHA-51(b)(5)(b), SA-240-304 Material
File: BC84-228
Question: Are full penetration welds for Category C and D joints as specified in UW-2(b) required
in vessels constructed of SA-240-304 stainless steel when the base metal, the deposited weld metal, and
other requirements of UHA-51(a) and (b) are met and impact testing of the vessel and production welds
are waived?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-28, Definition of Manufacturer
File: BC84-259
Question: UW-28 in Section VIII, Division 1, uses the term "Manufacturer." Is this meant to apply
to the designer/seller of the equipment or the fabricating contractor who performs the actual welding? In
this case, the designer/seller is responsible to the user of the equipment.
Reply: The term "Manufacturer" refers to the Certificate of Authorization Holder who stamps
the completed vessel.
Errata
Volume 6
Interpretation
VIII-79-73
Correct Question to read. Question: Would it be permissible under UG-36(c)(3)(a) of Section

VIII, Division 1 that a 2 in., 300 lb rating long weld neck inserted into a vessel shell, which would require
a 3.4375 in. hole cutting the shell or head, be classed as an opening requiring reinforcement according to
the rules of UG-37, when in fact the 2 in. long weld neck contains more inherent reinforcement strength
than a 2 in. pipe with 2 3/8 in. outside diameter?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(7)
File: BC81-019*, BC83-018
Question (1): May an ultrasonic examination, in accordance with UW-53, be used to assist in the
interpretation of the radiograph?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May an ultrasonic examination, in accordance with UW-53, be utilized to accept
questionable indications in radiographs ?
Reply (2): No.
Subject-. Section VIII, Division 1; Impact Testing Requirements
File: BC81-609*
Question: Is impact testing required for qualifying welding procedure to be used in welding 1 in.
NB 6000 psi forged coupling in a shell fabricated under Section VIII, Division 1, consisting of SA-240
Type 304, and SA-182 F16, clad on SA-302 Gr. B, and SA-204 Gr. B, steel plate? The plate is subjected
to a PWHT temperature of 915°F and the minimum operating temperature is 550°F.
Reply: No.
Note: This interpretation should have appeared in Interpretations No. 12 Section VIII, Division
1; covering interpretations issued from July 1, 1982, through December 31, 1982, and revised
interpretations issued from July 1, 1982, through April 1, 1983.
Interpretation: VIII-1-121R (Void see 83-121R-2 page 189)

File: BC81-184*
Question: May porosity defects that are discovered during a pressure test complying with UG-99 or
UG-100 after all manufacturing and brazing operations have been completed, in a part of a pressure
vessel that is manufactured from SB-61 or SB-62 bronze castings, be sealed by vacuum impregnating?
Reply: Provided that the pressure test requirements are subsequently satisfied, Section VIII,
Division 1, does not prohibit the use of vacuum impregnation of bronze castings after machining. Note
(4) to Table UNF-23.2 specifically prohibits welding or brazing of SB-61 or SB-62 castings. (See also
UNF-8.)
Note: On December 3, 1984, this interpretation was withdrawn for further committee
consideration.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12(c), Reference to Design Calculations
File: BC83-664*
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(c) states that for vessels which are not to be
radiographed, a value of E is taken from column (c) of Table UW-12 "provided that in all other design
calculations . . ." What is meant by "other design calculations"?
Reply: "Other design calculations" means all calculations which are required to satisfy the
loadings in UG-22 except those calculations which use a joint efficiency from column (c) of Table UW-
12 or are exempt as defined in UW-12(c), such as those for flat heads, etc. For example, in a seamless
cylindrical shell, attached to a seamless head by a butt joint which is visually examined, the
circumferential stress is based on E = 1.0. However, the value of S to be used in calculations shall be
0.8 times the value of allowable stress from the Tables in Subsection C.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Fig. UW-16.1
File: BC84-128*
Question: Is it permissible to attach screwed connections of the type shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch
(y-1) or (z-1) to SA-517 E plate that is less than 2 in. in thickness using the weld joint configuration
shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (y-1) or (z-1)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Material Usage Under Section VIII, Division 1, and UG-
84(b)(2)
File: BC80-251
Question(1): Is it the intent of the Foreword and all of Section II and Section VIII that only material
produced to the exact Code Edition or Addenda, as stated in the governing design specification, be used
in the construction of the pressure vessel?
Reply (1): No. Neither the Foreword of Section II nor the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1,
reference governing design specifications or the Code Edition or Addenda that might be referenced
therein. The pertinent Code words from the Foreword are:
After Code revisions are approved by Council they may be used beginning with the date of
issuance shown on the Addenda. Revisions become mandatory as minimum requirements six months
after such date of issuance, except for boilers or pressure vessels contracted for prior to the end of the six-
month period.
Question (2): May material which is produced to any version of the Code be used so long as there has
not been any changes made to the specification except for editorial changes?
Reply (2): In all construction other than Section III, use of materials to the latest Code Edition or
Addenda at the time of material manufacture is encouraged regardless of the contract date, but as is
indicated in the quoted excerpt from the Foreword in Reply (1), specifications in effect at the time of
contract or subsequent revision may also be used.
Specifications to editions or addenda earlier than that in effect at the time of vessel contract may
be used provided the requirements are identical (excluding editorial differences) or more stringent for the
grade, class, or type produced. Material produced to earlier specifications with requirements different
from the specification in effect at the time of contract may also be used provided the material
manufacturer or vessel manufacturer certifies with evidence acceptable to the Authorized Inspector that
the requirements of the version in effect at the time of contract will be met.
Question (3): Is the intent of UG-84(b)(2) to allow a vessel to be stamped at a lower operating
temperature than the Charpy impact temperature?
Reply (3): No.
Note: This interpretation should have appeared in Interpretations No. 7, covering interpretations
issued from January 1, 1980, through June 30, 1980.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-55, UG-80, UW-5, and Appendix 2
File: BC82-122
Question (1): What rules in Section VIII, Division 1, shall be used for the design of a flange with a full
face gasket?
Reply (1): Section VIII, Division 1, contains no rules for the design of flanges using full face
gaskets. [Refer to U-2(g).]
Question (2): For nonpressure parts fabricated of material not specified in Section VIII, Division 1,
does the act of welding one nonpressure part to another part prove weldability?
Reply (2): Yes; see UG-5(b).
Question (3): Does the process used to weld nonpressure parts to pressure parts (the shell) require a
WPS?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): In Section VIII, Division 1, for stiffening rings on a vessel under external pressure where
all the rules of UG-30 are met, is it also necessary to meet the rules of UG-82(b)?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Are roundness templates required for shells subject to internal pressure only?
Reply (5): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-93(d)(3) and (4)
File: BC82-827
Question(1) : Is the use of magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination in Section VIII, Division
1, limited to the detection of surface defects?
Reply (1): Liquid penetrant examination detects surface defects only. Magnetic particle
examination detects surface and may detect near surface defects.
Question (2): Where in Section VIII, Division 1, are the acceptance criteria for magnetic particle and
liquid penetrant examinations?
Reply (2): See Appendices 6 and 8 of Section VIII, Division 1.
Question (3): Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1, to use liquid penetrant examination to
determine whether a magnetic particle surface indication is nonrelevant?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is it permissible to use acceptance criteria from a material specification (see para. 9.3 of
SA-20) before and after welding?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Must the unacceptable discontinuities defined in Appendices 6 and 8 be removed?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Brazed Fabrication
File: BC83-025
Question: In a brazed construction, does the fabricator have to demonstrate that the material
properties after brazing are not below the minimum specified values?
Reply: No, provided the requirements of Section IX are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Putting Pressure-Temperature Markings on Pressure Parts
File: BC83-273
Question: Do the rules of UG-116(i) either require or prohibit including the pressure-temperature
rating on a vessel part for which Partial Data Reports are required?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-99, Hydrostatic Testing of Interconnected Vessels
File: BC83-308
Question: Is it permissible for a Manufacturer to perform the hydrostatic test required by UG-99 of
Section VIII, Division 1, and AT-300 of Section VIII, Division 2, on a number of interconnected vessels
using test gage(s) required by UG-102 or AT-500 and connected to one of the vessels in the test system?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-2-83-40.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-45, Nozzle Thickness
File: BC83-332
Question(1): Is the minimum thickness of standard wall pipe in UG-45(a)(4) of Section VIII, Division
1, the same as designated "Standard" in Table 2 and para. 8 of ANSI B36.10?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is ANSI B36.19 or ANSI B36.10 applicable in determining the minimum wall thickness
of a stainless steel nozzle in accordance with UG-45(a)(4)?
Reply (2): ANSI B36.10.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2 and Appendix Y, Bolted Flange Connections
File: BC83-359
Question (1): Does a flange designed to Appendix 2 of Section VIII, Division 1, require a bolted flange
connection to have a ring gasket?
Reply (1): Yes. See 2-1(a).
Question (2): Does a flange designed to Appendix Y of Section VIII, Division 1, require a metal-to-
metal flange connection to have a self-sealing gasket?
Reply (2): Appendix Y is a nonmandatory Appendix. It assumes that a self-sealing gasket is used.
See Y-1(b).
Question (3): Without a gasket between flanges, a flanged connection can be seal-welded all around on
the outside of the gap between the surface of two flanges to prevent the leakage due to pressure. Is this
acceptable for Section VIII, Division 1, construction?
Reply (3): Yes. See 2-1(e).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UNF-23.2, Material Properties of SB-75 Seamless
Copper Tubes
File: BC83-538
Question: May the ends of SB-75 annealed copper tubes to be contained wholly in the expanded
depth of tubesheet holes be annealed to a yield strength below the specified minimum of 9.0 ksi as given
in Table UNF-23.2 of Section VIII, Division 1, if the tubes are to be joined to the tubesheet by
expanding?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC83-568
Question (1): When spot radiography is performed in accordance with UW-52, to what extent shall
areas beyond the weld be included?
Reply (1): UW-52 does not specify the extent of examination beyond the spot of weld being
examined. The radiographic requirements of UW-52 apply to the weld deposit and the heat affected zone
in the spot selected for examination.
Question (2): Do the acceptance standards of UW-51(b)(1)-(4) apply to imperfections that may be
detected in adjacent base metal when performing spot radiography in accordance with UW-52?
Reply (2): No. The acceptance standards of UW-51(b)(1)-(4) apply to the weld metal and heat
affected zone of the weld spot being radiographed. (For imperfections detected in base metal adjacent to
the spot, see UG-93 and UG-95.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 12 and UHT-57
File: BC83-592
Question (1): Shall a discontinuity be rejected using the acceptance standards of Appendix 12 in
Section VIII, Division 1, when the amplitude exceeds 20(of the reference level, but does not exceed the
reference level and the length is greater than the limits specified in 12-3(b)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If indications produce a response greater than 50% of the reference level, shall the
discontinuities be recorded regardless of their length?
Reply (2): Yes. See 12-4.
Question (3): According to UHT-57(d), what must be done with a cracklike defect found using the
magnetic particle method when the liquid penetrant method does not find any relevant indications?
Reply (3): The cracklike defect shall be repaired or removed.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-56, Heat Treatment Requirements
File: BC83-636
Question: Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1, gives postweld heat treatment requirements
for carbon and low alloy steels. Do the minimum holding temperatures given in this Table refer to the
measured ambient temperature in the furnace, to the measured temperature at the surface of the product,
or to the measured temperature at the center of the product?
Reply: The temperatures given in Table UCS-56 refer to the product metal temperature. The
temperature is measured at the surface of the product with a sufficient soaking period that allows for full
thickness temperature penetration.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-28, UG-101, and Appendix 9, Spiral Welded Pipe
File: BC84-156
Question(1): Are the rules in 9-5(c)(2) applicable to half pipe jackets that spiral around the
vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are the rules of UG-28 applicable in determining the required thickness of the inner
vessel wall due to the pressure in the spiral half pipe jacket?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-20, High Temperature Galvanizing Process
File: BC84-264
Question: A vessel is designed for working temperatures between -20°F and 650°F. Is it
permissible under the requirements of UG-20 to galvanize the vessel at a temperature between 750°F and
850°F?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII-1, Interpretation VIII-81-113, Use of Bronze Nuts With Stainless Steel Bolts
File: BC84-266
Question (1): Does UG-13 allow the use of bronze nuts (SB-98, Alloy 651, 655, or 661) in conjunction
with stainless steel bolts (SA-193)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does UG-13 allow the use of cast bronze nuts (SB-584, Alloy 922, 937, or 976) in
conjunction with stainless steel bolts (SA-193)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UF-37, Hydrostatic Testing After Grinding
File: BC84-313
Question: If inside surface indications are removed/blended using a large radius internal grinder
after the hydrostatic test is conducted, is it required per UF-37 that a vessel be hydrostatically tested
again? All of the provisions of UF-30 are met.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UB-18 and UW-28(c)(2), Brazing
File: BC84-340
Question: May furnace brazing be performed by a non-Certificate Holder, provided the Certificate
Holder maintains control and responsibility for this work?
Reply: Yes. See UW-26(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-45, Thickness of Nozzle Neck
File: BC84-361
Question: When a nozzle is made up of a "set-on" welding boss with a tapered transition, a
piece of pipe, and a weld neck flange, do the minimum thickness requirements for nozzle necks in
UG-45 apply to all parts of the nozzle?
Reply: Yes. See U-1(e).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-2(g), Bolted Flange Connections
File: BC84-379
Question: What rules are applicable to the design of bolted connections without flanges?
Reply: See U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-40, Procedures for Postweld Heat Treatment
File: BC84-385
Question: UW-40(a)(5) has requirements for postweld heat treating a circumferential band around a
vessel. In the case of a tray ring connected to a shell, does the "at least six times the plate thickness" in
this paragraph apply to the weld throat thickness on either side of the connection or does it apply to the
shell thickness?
Reply: The plate thickness applies to the shell thickness.
File: BC84-410
Question: An expansion joint for a pressure vessel is to be fabricated by welding together two
flanged and flued heads. Do the provisions of Code Case 1177-7 apply to this case?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; "Year Built" in Data Report Forms
File: BC84-412
Question: Data Report Forms U-1 through U-4 have an entry to indicate the year in which the
vessel or part was built. Does this refer to the year in which the vessel or part was completed, final
inspection concluded, and the Data Report signed?
Reply:. Yes.
Subject: Sections 1 and VIII-1, Use of Parts Manufactured to Superseded Revisions
File: BC82-270B
Question (1): May parts for Section I or Section VIII vessels, made prior to the mandatory use date of
the Code to which the boiler or pressure vessel is to be constructed, be used, provided they meet the
requirements of the applicable Code Edition and Addenda and are established by the Certificate Holder to
be suitable for the design conditions?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is any special documentation required for such parts?
Reply (2): No.
Note: This interpretation also appears as 1-83-93.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-136(c)(3), National Board Representative
File: BC83-223C
Question: Can an Authorized Nuclear inspector who has a National Board commission serve as the
representative of the National Board to witness the capacity and operational testing of valves that have
been selected by another representative of the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors
when the valves are tested at an ASME accepted laboratory?
Reply: No. See UG-1 36(c).
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-320 (See Errata on page 469)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12, UG-27, and UG-32, Weld joint Efficiency
File: BC84-130
Question (1): A vessel is designed for internal pressure. The vessel consists of a cylindrical shell with a
longitudinal butt weld and torispherical heads butt welded to each end. There are also butt welded joints
within each head. It is (Is it) permissible to radiograph a part of the vessel, such as the head, for the
purpose of reducing the(required thickness by using a joint efficiency of 0.85 or 1.0 in the calculations for
that part with no stress reductions if the shell does not meet the requirements of full or spot radiography?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the situation in Question (1), except that the welds in the heads are spot radiographed,
a joint efficiency of 0.85 is used in the formula of UG-32(e) with no stress reduction, and the head-to-
shell joint is spot radiographed, is the answer yes or no?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): A pressure vessel is designed for internal pressure with a welded cylindrical shell
designed per UG-27 and welded heads designed per UG-32. Is it permissible to radiograph only one part
of the vessel, such as a head, for the purpose of reducing its required thickness by using a joint efficiency
of 0.85 or 1.0 in the calculations with no stress reductions?
Reply (3): No.

Errata
Volume 16
Interpretation In final sentence of Question (1), correct “It is” to read “Is it”
VIII-1-83-320
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 1, 1-5, Cone-to-Cone Cylinder Junction
Reinforcement
File: BC84-381
Question: Interpretation VIII-1-83-139 indicates that in Appendix 1, 1-5, for a given cone apex
angle and stress value, a decrease in design pressure would increase the likelihood of the juncture
requiring reinforcement. If a vessel is designed and stamped for a pressure that is greater than the
operating pressure, which shall govern the design of the reinforcement at the cone-to-cylinder junction?
Reply: The design pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix W, Table W-3, Note 57, Nozzle Attachment on Data
Report Forms
File: BC84-411
Question: Entries 18, 10, 20, 12, and 1 3 of Data Report Forms U-1, U-1 A, U-2, U-2A, and U-3,
respectively, have a column entitled "How Attached," which is covered by Note 57 of Table W-3. Do
these requirements refer to the method of attachment of the nozzle or inspection opening or refer to the
way in which the reinforcement material is attached?
Reply: They refer to the method of attachment of the nozzle or inspection opening.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34(c)(2), Opening in Flat Circular Cover
File: BC84-429
Question: A flat circular cover is designed to UG-34(c)(2) using Eq. (2), taking into account the
edge moment due to bolt loads. There is an opening in the cover for which reinforcement is provided per
UG-39(b). When thickness t is determined for reinforcement, may Eq. (2) of UG-34(c)(2) be used?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-36(c)(3), UG-42, and UG-53, Reinforcement for Tube
Holes
File: BC84-430
Question (1): Do the rules of UG-53 apply to tube holes where the method of attachment is by
welding?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Shall the size of tube holes be necessarily limited to a size exempted from reinforcement
requirements in UG-36(c)(3)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Must the pitch of the tube hole pattern in UG-53 be limited to twice the diameter of the
tube given for multiple openings in UG-42?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-30, Size of Fillet Welds for Stiffening Rings
File: BC84-545
Question: UG-30(c) states that all attachment welding of stiffening rings shall comply with the
requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 is there any reference which gives requirements for fillet weld
size to be used for attachment welding of stiffening rings?
Reply: No. See UW-18.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 8, Vision of NDE Personnel
File: BC84-564
Question: Does 8-2(a) require NDE personnel performing liquid penetrant examination to obtain
medical doctor's certification for the required annual visual examinations?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-23 and UG-34 C Factor for a Flat Circular Head
File: BC84-592
Question: For a flat circular head of the configuration shown in Fig, UG-34 sketch (p) is it
permissible to increase the allowable stress to 1.5S in the formulas of UG-34?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-664*
Question: For a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel that is made up of a seamless shell and seamless
formed heads joined together by the butt welds listed in Table UW-12, column (c) is it permissible to use
the allowable stress value prescribed for the material in Subsection C without applying a stress reduction
factor when determining nozzle reinforcement requirements in accordance with UG-37(b)?
Reply: No. if the shell and heads are joined by the butt welds listed in Table UW-12, column (c),
an 80% factor shall be applied to the stresses used in nozzle reinforcement calculations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 10, 10-12, Calibration of Measurement and Test
Equipment
File: BC80-289*, BC85-158
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction, 10-12 of Appendix 10 Quality Control System
requires that "the manufacturer shall have a system for the calibration of examination, measuring and test
equipment used . . ." Is traceability to a national standard required?
Reply: No.
File: BC81-184**
Question: Note (4) to Table UNF-23,2 specifically prohibits welding or brazing of certain castings.
Where Note (4) applies, may porosity defects that are discovered during a pressure test complying with
UG-99 or UG-100, after all manufacturing and brazing operations have been completed, in a part of a
pressure vessel that is manufactured from such castings, be sealed by vacuum impregnating?
Reply: Provided that the pressure test requirements are subsequently satisfied, Section VIII,
Division 1, does not prohibit the use of vacuum impregnation of such castings after machining.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UB-18 and UW-28(c)(2), Brazing
File: BC84-340*
Question (1): Can the criteria in UW-28(c)(2) for automatic welding processes be applied to UB-18 for
furnace brazing non-pressure-bearing attachments which have essentially no load carrying function (such
as extended heat transfer surfaces) to pressure parts?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May furnace brazing be performed by a non-Certificate Holder, provided the Certificate
Holder maintains control and responsibility for this work?
Reply (2): Yes. See UW-26(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116, UG-118, and UG-119, Arrangement of Markings
File: BC82-284
Question: When the vessel geometry precludes the use of the marking arrangement shown in Fig.
UG-118, may an alternative arrangement be used if acceptable to the Inspector, provided the Code
symbol and associated required markings are retained as a grouping, and all other Code required markings
are included with no intervening additional data
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1;U-1(e)(1), Geometric Scope for Piping Connections
File: BC82-755
Question (1): A nozzle for a piping connection to a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel consists of a nozzle
neck joined by a butt weld to a section of pipe which is joined by another butt weld to a welding neck
flange. May the vessel Manufacturer include the section of pipe and the welding neck flange in his
construction, but exclude the section of pipe, the welding neck flange, and their joining weld from the
Scope of the Code?
Reply (1): Yes. See U-1(e)(1)(a).
Question (2): If Reply (1) is yes, how should this condition be documented?
Reply (2): By an appropriate note on the Manufacturer's Data Report Form.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11(c)(2), Use of SA-53, Grade B Pipe for Standard Pressure
Parts
File: BC83-320
Question: May butt welding fittings, such as elbows, 180 deg. return bends, reducers, and tees,
which otherwise meet the requirements of ASTM A 234-75 manufactured from SA-53, Type E, Grade B
pipe, be utilized as standard pressure parts for use other than vessel shells?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-31(c), Tackweld Requirements
File: BC83-324, BC83-384
Question: For tackwelds which are not to be removed completely, UW-31(c) requires that their ends
be "properly prepared by grinding or other suitable means." Are these requirements satisfied when a
tackweld is made in such a manner that the starting and stopping ends are blended into the base metal and
therefore suitable to be incorporated into the final weld without modification?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-40(d), Reinforcement of Nozzle Under External Pressure
File: BC84-115
Question: UG-40(d) has a definition for trn the required thickness of a seamless nozzle wall. For
external pressure conditions, is trn to be determined per UG-27 or UG-28?
Reply: UG-28.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1; UG-101(a)(1) and Appendix 14, MAWP for Embossed
Assembly
File: BC84-125
Question: An embossed assembly is welded by a procedure qualified in accordance with Section IX

with the addition of filler wire. Is it correct that Appendix 14, 14-10, does not apply and that the
applicable rules are contained in UW-19(c)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Part ULW and Article D-11
File: BC84-334
Question: Is it permissible per Part ULW and Article D-11 to measure the thickness of a layered
vessel solely at the ends due to the fact that some gaps are permitted between layers?
Reply: No; however, the total number of layers can be reduced when the minimum required
metal thickness is achieved. See Interpretation VIII-81-14.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-2-83-42

.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56, UHA-102, and UCL-34, Postweld Heat Treatment,
1974 Edition
File: BC84-384
Question: According to the 1974 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1, if postweld heat treatment is
required by UCS-56, and if the warnings in UHA-102 and UCL-34 against some postweld heat treatment
apply, do they waive the requirement of UCS-56?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-46(a) and (f), Inspection Openings and Noncorrosive
Service
File: BC84-599
Question (1): UG-46(a) does not require inspection openings for vessels which are in noncorrosive
service." Is there any size limitation on vessels covered by this rule?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May the requirements in UG-46(0(6) be used in lieu of those in UG-46(f)(1), (2), and
(3)?
Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): UG-46(f)(6) allows a single inspection opening to be used instead of smaller inspection
openings if its size and location provide at least an equal view of the interior of the vessel. Does this
require the area of the single opening to have at least the total area of the smaller openings.
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79(d), Elliptical Manway Rings
File: BC84-601
Question (1): Do the words "and other pressure boundary parts" as contained and applied in UCS-79(d)
encompass cold formed elliptical manway rings when used as pressure boundary parts?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is yes, what formula in UCS-79(d) is used to compute the extreme fiber
elongation when required of formed elliptical manway rings?
Reply (2): The extreme fiber elongation for formed elliptical manway rings shall be determined by
the formula for single curvature surfaces as contained in UCS-79(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix M, M-5(a), Full Area Stop Valve
File: BC84-615
Question: Appendix M, M-5(a), describes the possible use of a "full-area stop valve." Does full area
mean that the minimum flow area in the stop valve shall at least equal the inlet area of the pressure relief
device?
Reply: Yes. See UG-135(b).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34, Thickness Calculation for Unstayed Flat Head
File: BC84-635
Question: For a flat head configuration not shown in Fig. UG-34, what is the basis of selecting
Formula (1) or (2) of UG-34 for determining the minimum required thickness of the flat head?
Reply: For a configuration not shown in Fig. UG-34, the designer shall determine whether or not
there is an edge moment, what that edge moment is, and whether or not Formula (1), Formula (2), or
some other formula is applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Bolted Flange Connections
File: BC84-656
Question (1): Is it permitted to fabricate a bolted flange connection of hubless rectangular cross section
similar to Fig. 2-4 sketch 8, but with twin fillet welds only, which has been machined from a ring which
has been flame cut in one piece from carbon steel plate material?
Reply (1): No. The groove weld must be equal to c in accordance with Fig. 2-4 sketch 8.
Question (2): Does the examination requirement in Appendix 2, 2-2(d)(3), apply for the following
cases?
(a) hubless flange machined from a ring which has been flame cut from a carbon steel plate;
(b) hubless flange machined from a hot forged carbon manganese ring;
(c) hubless flange machined from carbon steel plate or bar stock which has been formed into a
ring with end joints butt welded by a manual inert gas process.
Reply (2): No. Appendix 2, 2-2(d), is applicable only to hubbed flanges.
Question (3): Do the requirements for ferritic steel in Appendix 2-2(b) apply to only those materials in
Part UHT?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): Interpretation VIII-1-83-21 discusses the use of hubless optional loose type flanges
attached by only two fillet welds. Do the rules in Appendix 2 allow the use of such flanges with a back
fillet weld minimum throat dimension of 0.7c per Fig. 2-4 sketch (3)?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-40(d)(3), Limit of Reinforcement
File: BC84-662
Question: For the nozzle configuration shown in Fig. UG-40 sketches (e), (e-1), and (e-2), the rule
given in the Note beneath the sketches is followed to establish te. Once te is established, limits of
reinforcement are established according to UG-40(c). May all of the excess area of metal within these
limits, as given in UG-40(c) and (d), be considered as metal available for reinforcement?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCD-78 and Code Case 1939, Repair of Ductile Cast Iron
File: BC84-667
Question (1): With reference to UCD-78 and Code Case 1939, may discontinuities which permit
leakage in ferritic ductile cast iron materials be repaired by welding?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May unacceptable discontinuities which reduce the wall thickness below the design
dimensions in ferritic ductile cast iron materials be repaired by welding?
Reply (2): Yes,
Question (3): May unacceptable discontinuities which only sever the required contour of ferritic ductile
cast iron material be repaired by welding?
Reply (3): Yes,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-9, Tagging of Welding Material
File: BC84-674
Question: UG-9 contains certain requirements for the qualification and identification of welding
materials. Under controls established in the Manufacturer's Quality Control System, may welding
materials which have satisfied the requirements of UG-9 be periodically removed from their containers or
packages as required to maintain production without additional tagging and any unused material returned
to the container or package?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-38, Weld Repairs
File: BC84-675
Question: For visible defects in welds that require repairs, must the Manufacturer first obtain
acceptance by the Inspector for the method and extent of repairs as stated in UG-78 for base metal
repairs?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11, Pressure Part Manufacture
File: BC84-677
Question(1): Does the phrase "other than the shop of the manufacturer" in UG-11 mean that a pressure
vessel Manufacturer can not make its own parts which will be used on the completed vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is no, does the Manufacturer have to identify the pressure parts which he
manufactures in accordance with UG-11(a)(1)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): If Reply (1) is no, may the Manufacturer sell its pressure parts to a sister company which
does not operate under the same ASME Certificate of Authorization without either satisfying all the
requirements of UG-11 or satisfying the requirements of UG-116(i) and UG-120(c)?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-120, Stamping of Pressure Parts
File: BC84-695
Question: May a Manufacturer build a pressure part for a vessel which meets all "UM"
requirements of U-1(k), stamp the part "U M" in accordance with UG-116(b) and (i), and prepare a Partial
Data Report in accordance with UG-120(c)?
Reply: No. See Data Report Forms U-2 and U-2A.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-46 and UW-47, WPS Assignments
File: BC84-589
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1, require that each welded joint in a vessel be traceable to a
WPS?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1, specifically set forth the period of time or a particular
document to be used in designating the WPS to be used for a welded joint?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May the document used to record the WPS used in a joint be a traveler, drawing,
inspection report, separate log, etc., provided that it is set forth in the Manufacturer's Quality Control
System?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-10, Requirements for Non-Code Material
File: BC82-385B, BC83-085
Question: If a non-Code material is used for nonpressure parts and is joined to a Code material by a
welding procedure qualified in accordance with Section IX, may other heats of the same nonCode
material which conform to the specification requirements of the material used during the Welding
Procedure Qualification be joined to the Code material thereafter for such nonpressure applications
without performing the chemical and mechanical tests required by UG-10 or the bend tests of UG-5 on
each piece of material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(c)(1) and (2), Duties of Inspector and Manufacturer's
Quality Control System
File: BC84-335
Question: UG-90(c)(1) summarizes the Inspector’s duties. In determining the extent of his
verification of compliance with the rules, should the Inspector consider the requirements and application
of the Manufacturer's Quality Control System?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-134, Use of Hydraulic or Pneumatic Lift Device to
Establish Safety Valve Set Pressure
File: BC84-602
Question: UG-134 specifies the set pressure tolerances for pressure relief valves used in Section
VIII, Division 1 construction. At the time of initial adjustment by the Manufacturer or an assembler, may
a hydraulic or pneumatic lift device be used to check opening pressure and valve function in lieu of a full
pressure test of the valve?
Reply: A hydraulic or pneumatic lift device may be used to apply an auxiliary lifting load on the
valve spring to establish the set pressure of a pressure relief valve, provided calibrated testing equipment
and testing procedures are followed. While actual valve blowdown and valve performance characteristics
cannot thus be verified, valve set pressure may be determined to an acceptable degree of accuracy using
this testing technique.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-78, Examination of Material Repairs
File: BC84-676
Question: If UW-42 does not apply, does UG-78 require a PT or MT examination for material with
pitted areas and gouges that are repaired using an approved WPS?
Reply: No. However, the Authorized Inspector may require such examination in his review of
the Manufacturer's method of repair.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Part UCI, Repairs of Cast Iron Vessels
File: BC85-016
Question (1): For cast iron pressure vessels, built under Part UCI, are surface defects acceptable when
the remaining wall thickness under the defect is less than that required by Code calculations?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): What is the minimum spacing allowed between adjacent plugs?
Reply (2): See the formula in UCI-78(a)(9).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-85(c), Local Heating of Shell Plate
File: BC85-025
Question: UCS-85(c) describes some cases of local heating which are not to be included in heat
treatment. Is it intended that local heating above the lower critical temperature for the hot forming of
shell plate be included in heat treatment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix AA, AA-5
File: BC85-028
Question: If the channel and/or shell are of layered construction per Part ULW, can te in Appendix
AA, AA-5, be calculated using the total shell thickness (ts)and/or total channel thickness (tc) less any
corrosion allowance?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-101(m) and Fig. UG-34 Sketch (e), Joint Efficiency of
Seamless Shell With flat Heads
File: BC85-066
Question: A burst test is to be performed on a vessel which is seamless except for double fillet
welds (Fig. UG-34 sketch (e)] between the shell and flat heads. Should a joint efficiency of 1.0 be used in
the formula in UG-101(m)(2)(a)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Hubbed Flanges
File: BC85-074
Question: Appendix 2, 2-7(b), gives stress formulas for loose type flanges with hubs when the
designer chooses to do calculations without considering the hub. If the hubs are not considered in the
calculations but are used in construction, may the material requirements in Appendix 2, 2-2(d), be
waived?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-13(d), Use of ERW Pipe
File: BC85-096
Question: Do the requirements of UW-13(d) apply to ERW pipe if the pipe is used as a shell and is
offset as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch(k)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-46(f), Attachments in Inspection Openings
File: BC85-124
Question: Would the requirements of UG-46(f)(2) be satisfied by providing two threaded

openings not less than 2 in. pipe size from which piping, instruments, or similar attachments can be
removed, if the openings meet the requirements of UG-46(f)(7)(a) and (b)?
Reply: No. UG-46(f)(7) applies to flanged connections only.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-37 and Fig. UG-37.1, A1 and F Factors
File: BC85-138
Question (1): For the calculation of A1 in UG-37, is tn = 0 when a pipe nipple is screwed into a flat
head a distance which is not the full thickness of the head?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the F factor in Fig. UG-37 equal to 1.0 for the case of a flat head?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(c)(2) and UW-52(b)(1), Multiduplicate Vessels
File: BC85-187
Question: Vessels are identical in every detail, except that fittings are in different locations, the
shell lengths vary from one order to another, or the brackets are different. May these vessels be grouped
together when considering the 50 ft requirements of UW-52(b)(1)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Appendices 11 and 15, Code Stamping of Hyperbaric
Vessels
File: BC77-701 *
Question: In accordance with Appendix 15 of Section VIII, Division 1, and Appendix 11 of Section
VIII, Division 2, may a pressure vessel incorporating a cylindrical acrylic shell be stamped as complying
with Section VIII, provided the Manufacturer's Data Report includes a comment that the nonmetallic shell
is made of a material not covered by the Code rules and, therefore, the shell is not part of the Code
construction?
Reply: This request was considered by the Subcommittee on Pressure Vessels, and it was
concluded that since Section VIII does not include the nonmetallic material and does not have design and
fabrication rules to cover the acrylic shell, the completed vessel cannot be stamped with the Code symbol
stamp. For the record, the rules do not prohibit metallic parts from being constructed to the Code rules
and stamped as parts, provided design, material, fabrication, inspection, and testing are in accordance
with the rules.
Note: The interpretation that VIII-1-83-361R supersedes was issued on December 6, 1977, and
should have appeared in Interpretations No. 2, covering interpretations issued from July 1, 1977, through
December 31, 1977. It was published as an errata item and without an assigned number in Interpretations
No. 6, covering interpretations issued from July 1, 1979, through December 31, 1979.
VIII-1-83-361R also appears as VIII-2-83-44R.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12, UG-31, and UG-37(b), Shell Thicknesses
File: BC83-559
Question (1): For vessels built to the rules of UW-12(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, does the 80%
stress reduction factor apply in determining the shell thickness when the shell is made from tube or pipe
and the rules of UG-31 are applied?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the vessel described in Question (1), do the rules for calculating t, as described in
UG-37 for determining the minimum required thickness of a seamless shell for reinforcement calculations
require the application of the 80% stress reduction factor?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 13 and UG-34, Design of End Closure
File: BC84-643
Question: No explicit design rules are written in Appendix 13 for rib-stiffened end closures for
noncircular vessels. May such an end closure be designed using commonly accepted methods of
engineering mechanics with no proof test required?
Reply: Yes; however the requirements of U-2(g) must be met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Foreword and UG-93, Certification of Material
File: BC85-179
Question(1): May an ASTM material, which was not certified by the Material Manufacturer to a
specific edition of the ASTM specification, be used without further testing or certification, provided the
Code required certification, per UG-93, indicates the material meets the requirements of the applicable
specification for the designated material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the Manufacturer required to establish the equivalency?
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-83-365 (See Below)

Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Packed joints for Lethal Service Applications
File: BC85-194
Question: Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 or Division 2, prohibit the use of packed joints in
vessels constructed to lethal service requirements [for example, UW-2(a)]?
Reply: No; however, consideration of the appropriateness of such connections in a particular

installation is the responsibility of the user or his designated agent [for example, U-2(a)].
Subject: Sections 1 and VIII-1, Qualification of NDE Personnel to a Qualification Program Other
Than SNT-TC-1A, 1980 Edition
File: BC83-535A
Question: Under what conditions may a manufacturer make use of an NDE personnel qualification
standard other than SNT-TC-I A for Sections I and VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, construction?
Reply: Para. PW-51.5 in Section I, para. UW-51(a)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1, and para. Al-
501(c) in Section VIII, Division 2, establish the requirements for NDE certification. Each Manufacturer
is required to have an approved written practice for training and certification of NDE personnel. SNT TC-
1A shall be used as the guide to develop the written practice; however, a written practice developed in
conformance to another standard may also contain the elements necessary to satisfy SNT-TC-1 A.
Provided the Manufacturer demonstrates to the review team considering the issuance or renewal of a
Certificate of Authorization that his written practice includes all of the elements that would be required
using SNT-TC-1A as a guideline, that practice can be accepted for the issuance of the applicable
Certificate of Authorization and used in Code construction under Section I and/or Section VIII, Divisions
1 and 2. Any changes to the written practice following the issuance or renewal of the Certificate of
Authorization must be reviewed and accepted by the Authorized Inspector.
Note: This interpretation also appears as 1-86-06.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-20, Appendix 5, and U-2(g), Axial Compression of
Cylinders at Elevated Temperatures
File: BC79-696
Question: Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Division 1, for design temperature limits
when determining maximum allowable longitudinal compressive stress?
Reply: There are no specific provisions in Section VIII, Division 1, for determining design
temperature limits for maximum allowable longitudinal compressive stress, except what is provided in
UG-20(a) and (b), which allows the values in Appendix 5 to be used. When the temperatures exceed those
given in Appendix 5, the provisions of U-2(g) shall be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 1, 1-6, Pressure on Convex Side of Dished Floating
Head
File: BC85-223
Question: A spherically dished cover as shown in Fig. 1-6(d) has pressure on the convex side. For
the head thickness calculations in Appendix 1, 1-6(g)(1), does the pressure P need to be multiplied by the
factor of 1.67 given in UG-33(a)(1) when the dished head is treated as a torispherical head?
Reply: Yes. See Appendix 1, 1-6(a). UG-33(a)(2) shall also be met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-2(g) and UW-32(a), Scale on Welding Joint Preparation
File: BC85-227
Question: Is it permissible under UW-32 to perform procedure qualification weld tests with tight
and clean mill scale, left on the test plate, with 1/2 in. for ferrous materials and 2 in. for nonferrous
materials if the physical test results meet the requirements of Section IX?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Fig. UW-13.4 and Fig. UW-16.1, Tapered Transition
File: BC85-229
Question (1): Is the taper angle of Fig. UW-16.1(g) limited to 45 deg.?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For nozzles without a bolted flange (nozzle neck is welded directly to attached piping), is
it acceptable to add a 45 deg. transition taper of the nozzle reinforcement to the tapered transition detail of
Fig. UW-13.4?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-56, PWHT of P-No. 1 Material
File: BC85-245
Question (1): A vessel having a 1 1/4 in. shell of P-No. 1 material has a 5/8 in. nozzle welded to it with
a 3/8 in. fillet weld as shown in Fig. UW-16.1(a). The vessel does not fall under the requirements in UW-
2 or UCS-67. According to UCS-56 and Table UCS-56, is postweld heat treatment required, since the
groove weld of the nozzle is over 1/2 in.?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When postweld heat treatment is required, must it be applied to the entire vessel?
Reply (2): Postweld heat treatment may be required for a pressure vessel, pressure vessel part, or
particular welds. See UCS-56(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-101, Proof Test for External Pressure
File: BC85-283
Question: May UG-101 be used to establish the maximum allowable working pressure of an
external pressure vessel?
Reply: No, except for UG-101(p).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-3 and UW-12, Joint Categories and Efficiencies for Brazed
Construction
File: BC85-284
Question(1): A brazed aluminum plate fin exchanger includes a nozzle, a header, and a core. Do the
joint categories in UW-3 apply?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): What joint efficiencies apply for the configuration in Question (1)?
Reply (2): See UB-14.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 13, Rectangular Vessels Longitudinally Reinforced
by Combination Welded-on Members and Stays
File: BC85-285
Question: Is it permissible within the provisions of Appendix 13, 13-1(c), and U-2(g) to design
vessels of rectangular cross section which are reinforced in a plane parallel to the long axis of the vessels
by a combination of continuous welded-on members and widely spaced stays?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UW-12, Joint Types
File: BC85-286
Question: May a single welded, full penetration butt joint, less backing, be considered a Type
No. 1 joint, as given in Table UW-12, for diameters less than 24 in. O.D. if the requirements of UW-35
and UW-37(d) are met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-16(d), Actual Pipe Thickness
File: BC85-287
Question (1): Does UG-16(d) allow the selection of nominal pipe size material which has an actual
minimum thickness which is equal to or greater than the calculated minimum wall thickness, regardless of
the fact that the undertolerances provide material which is less than that required?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UG-16(d) require that the nominal thickness less the manufacturing undertolerance
be equal to or greater than the minimum thickness required?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-127(b)(4), Telltale indicators
File: BC85-290
Question(1): Is it necessary to provide more than one of the telltale indicators given in UG-127(b)(4)
to satisfy its requirements?
Reply (1): No,
Question (2): In applications involving toxic gases, does UG-127(b)(4) require that a specific type of
telltale indicator be employed?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(c)(6), Liquids Other Than Water
File: BC85-291
Question: Does U-1(c)(6) apply to any liquid other than water?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-84(b)(2), Impact Testing Temperature
File: BC85-294
Question: Does the inability to locate a lab that is able to safely test a specimen at the temperature
given in UG-84(b)(2) waive this requirement?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-79(d)(3), Part Thickness
File: BC85-319
Question: In UCS-79(d)(3), does the 5/8 in. mean that the thickness of the part before cold forming
exceeds 0.625 in. or that the nominal thickness of the part, after taking into account the mill
undertolerance, exceeds 0.625 in.?
Reply: The 5/8 in. refers to the nominal thickness of the part.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHA-33(b), Required Radiography of High Alloy Vessels
File: BC85-321
Question: UHA-33(b) requires radiography for vessels made of certain types of materials. Does
spot radiography satisfy this requirement?
Reply: No. Full radiography is required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56(c), PWHT of P-No. 1 to P-No. 8 Materials
File: BC85-323
Question: Does UCS-56(c) require postweld heat treatment for the attachment of a nozzle, made of
P-No. 8 material, to a flat head, made of P-No. 1 material lined with P-No. 8 material?
Reply: No, provided the P-No. 8 is welded to the P-No. 8 material and/or the weld sizes are
exempt under Table UCS-56.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-37, UG-40, and UW-16, Use of Reinforcing Saddles
File: BC85-324
Question: Do UG-37, UG-40, and UW-16 prohibit the use of contoured reinforcing saddles which
are attached to the shell and nozzle neck with full fillet welds?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(c)(l-) and UW-51(a)(3), Authorized Inspector Review of
Radiographs
File: BC85-326
Question: As the Authorized Inspector must ensure that NDE results are acceptable, is it
permissible for a Certificate Holder to allow the Authorized Inspector’s review to constitute the only
interpretation of the radiographs (assuming the Authorized Inspector is fully qualified in accordance with
his employer's written practice and SNT-TC-I A 1980)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 14, Table 14-10.4.1, Thickness Limitations
File: BC85-327
Question: Are the thicknesses t1, in Table 14-10.4.1, the minimum after corrosion allowance is
deducted?
Reply: No. They are the actual minimum and maximum material thicknesses as fabricated.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, ULW-52(a), ULW-54(a), and AF-810.20(b),
Examination of Welded Layers
File: BC85-330
Question: Is it permissible under ULW-52(a) and ULW-54(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, and AF-
810-20(b) of Division 2 to weld and magnetic particle examine each layer separately in lieu of testing the
entire completed joint if staggered seam construction is used?
Reply: Yes, for the individual layers. However, the inner shell requires 100% radiographic
examination according to ULW-51.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116(c), Marking of Seamless Head With Welded Plug
File: BC85-334
Question: Is a head considered seamless according to UG-116(c) if it has a hole which is plugged
and radiographed?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 13, Obround Pressure Vessels
File: BC84-591
Question (1): Appendix 13, 13-11(b), states that all reinforcement members have the same moment of
inertia. Is it permissible to design a vessel with reinforcement members having differing moments of
inertia, provided the minimum moment of inertia is used for all calculations?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): A short, obround pressure vessel member (nozzle) is reinforced at one end by a welded-
on flange which follows the contour of the vessel member, and at the other end by passing through the
vessel wall, where it is also welded. May this be designed using the rules of 13-11?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): 13-11(b) states, "For any other type of reinforced obround cross section vessel, see U-2."
Does this apply to an obround nozzle?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-35(d) and U-I(e)(1)(b), Material for Pressure Warning
Devices
File: BC84-600
Question: As required by UG-35, a pressure warning device is installed on a quick-actuating closure

for the purpose of warning the operator if the device is pressurized prior to opening. The pressure
warning device is threaded directly into the quick-actuating closure and is subjected to internal pressure,
May the pressure parts of the pressure warning device be constructed of materials not identified with a
specification permitted by Section VIII, Division 1, but which satisfy the conditions given in UG-10?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4, Hubbed Flanges
File: BC85-464
Question (1): Are the flanges in Figs. 2-4(7), (8), (8a), and (9) considered hubbed flanges due to the
attachment welds at the back of the flanges?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the fillet weld at the back of the flange in Fig. 2-4(7) is removed, would this be
considered a hubbed flange?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UHT-18 and UW-13(g), Recessed Nozzles
File: BC85-466
Question: Do nozzles designed per UHT-18 and conforming to Fig. UHT-18.1 sketch (f) have to
meet the requirements of UW-13(g)?
Reply: No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-85(b), Hot Forming and Heat Treatment
File: BC85-140
Question: For vessels built to the rules of UCS-85(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, does the term
"heat treatment" include heating for the sole purpose of hot forming?
Reply: No. See ASTM Definitions E 44, the second sentence of the definition of "heat
treatment."
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UCS-85(b), Hot Forming and Heat Treatment
File: BC85-140*
Question: For vessels built to the rules of UCS-85(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, does the term
"heat treatment" include heating for the sole purpose of hot forming?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-51(b), Incomplete Fusion or Penetration
File: BC85-289
Question (1): Is reduction in base metal thickness adjacent to a weld (undercut) considered
incomplete fusion or penetration according to UW-51(b)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is concave root surface (suck-up) considered incomplete penetration?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is melt-thru considered incomplete penetration?
Reply (3): Melt-thru could result in incomplete penetration or could be rejected because of excessive
reinforcement.
Question (4): Is hollow bead welding considered incomplete penetration?

Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-5(b), Tack Welding of Nut to Bolt
File: BC85-451
Question: Does UCS-5(b) prohibit the tack welding of a stud bolt of more than 0.350% carbon to
nut consisting of more than 0.35% carbon?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-119 and Appendix 14, 14-50, Adhesive Attachment of
Nameplates
File: BC85-487
Question (1): Appendix 14, 14-51(a)(3), limits the adhesive attachments of nameplates to clean, bare
metal surfaces. is a surface considered to be clean and bare if it is aluminum flame sprayed or galvanized?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any limitations on when and where a vessel nameplate may be attached,
provided complete identification and traceability of the vessel is maintained in accordance with a quality
control system acceptable to the Authorized Inspector?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-46, Inspection Openings
File: BC85-488
Question: Under the requirements of UG-46(c), is it required that the alternate inspection openings
in a 7 ft diameter vessel in noncorrosive service be two 4 in. by 6 in. handholes?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-23, Allowable Stress for ERW Pipe
File: BC85-496
Question: When allowable stresses for ERW pipe given in Table UCS-23 are used in design
calculations, is it necessary to multiply the listed allowables by the 0.85 factor given in Note (27)?
Reply: No. However, your attention is directed to the note in the table heading and UW-12 for
additional stress multipliers that may apply, depending on examination of butt welds that may exist in the
vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-125 and UG-133, Pressure Relief Devices
File: BC85-502
Question: A vessel is pressurized by a centrifugal pump, and the shut-off head of the pump plus its
maximum suction pressure exceeds the MAWP of the vessel by less than I0% of the MAWP, or 3 psi,
whichever is greater. A relief valve of size 1/2 in. NPS is provided on the vessel and set at the MAWP of
the vessel. Does this conform to the rules in UG-125 and UG-133?
Reply: Yes, but other sources of overpressure must be considered, such as external fire.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-11(c) and UG-120(c), Partial Data Reports for Manway
Assemblies
File: BC85-503
Question: A manway assembly is supplied by other than the vessel Manufacturer for installation.
Parts for this assembly include a rolled and welded ring used for pressure retaining. According to
UG-11(c) and UG-120(c), does this assembly require a Partial Data Report?
Reply: No, provided the requirements for Manufacturer's standards in UG-11(c) are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-1(h), Directly Fired Vessels
File: BC85-522
Question: May a fired vessel which generates steam by mixing water with hot combustion products
as they exit the vessel into a piping network be built under U-1(h)?
Reply: Yes. See footnote 1 of the Introduction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-16(b)(2),. Minimum Wall Thickness
File: BC85-599
Question: Are full welded heat transfer plates of plate-type heat exchangers exempted by UG-
16(b)(2) from the 1/16 in.(see errata page 633). minimum wall thickness requirements?
Reply: Yes.
Errata
Volume 19
Interpretation
VIII-1-86-36 In the second line of the Question, correct 1/6 in. to read 1/16 in.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-85, Heat Treatment
File: BC85-606
Question: During the fabrication of a nonimpact tested pressure vessel made from SA-516 Grade 70
that is 5 in. thick, normalization of the material is conducted by the fabricator as a part of a hot forming
process. In order to satisfy the requirements of UCS-85:
(a) are mill test specimens required to have the heat treatment associated with the hot forming
simulated?
(b) is it required that the manufacturer define for the mill the anticipated cooling rate from the
critical temperature during the hot forming operation?
Reply:
(a) Yes.
(b) Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-4, Material Test Reports
File: BC85-608
Question: Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1, that the manufacturer of Code items shall
examine the material test report or certificate of compliance (when these documents are required) and
shall determine that it represents the material and meets the requirements of the material specification?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-35(a)(2), Undercutting
File: BC85-610
Question: Is reduction in thickness adjacent to the weld considered to be lack of fusion when
applying the requirements of UW-35(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UHA-51, AD-121.2, and AM-211.3, Impact Testing
Requirements
File: BC85-145
Question(1): Welded joints of AHA-1 or UHA-23 material are subjected to design temperatures which
are not required to be impact tested. If the average material temperature goes below the limits given in
UHA-51 or AM-213, is impact testing required?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the Charpy impact test temperature reduction criteria given in Section VIII, Divisions
1 and 2, apply to U HA and AHA materials respectively?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Table UCS-56, PWHT of P-No. 1 Material
File: BC85-468
Question: Welded joints are made of all P-No. 1 material and the connections do not form ligaments
requiring increased shell thickness. Also, the service requirements of UCS-67 and UW-2(a) are not
applicable. Does Table UCS-56 require postweld heat treatment for the weld joints described below?
(a) A Schedule 160, NPS 2 nozzle (2.375 in. O.D. X 0.344 in. wall) is attached to a 0.75 in. thick
shell using 200°F preheat and the attachment detail shown in Fig. UW-16.6 sketch (a).
(b) Same as (a), but preheat is less than 200°F.
(c) Same as (a), but using detail shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (e).
(d) A cylindrical welding forging with a 1.5 in. I.D. and 0.625 in. wall thickness at the point of
welding is attached to a 0.75 in. thick shell using 200°F minimum preheat and the attachment
detail shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (a).
Reply:
(a) No.
(b) No.
(c) No.
(d) No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-90(c)(1)(i), Duties of the Authorized inspector
File: BC85-591
Question (1): Do the requirements of UG-90(c)(1)(i) require the Inspector to review all radiographs for
the vessel that he inspects?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If he is not required to review all radiographs, what percentage should be reviewed by the
Inspector to assure the results of the examination are acceptable and in compliance with the requirements
Reply (2): The Code does not specify the percentage of radiographs to be reviewed; however, the
Inspector must review a sufficient number to verify the examination was performed and the results are
acceptable.
Question (3): If the Inspector is required to verify the examination, does he have the authority to refuse
to accept radiographs, for legitimate cause, that have been accepted by a Level II or III radiographer?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-50 and UW-51, (UW-51 and UW-52) Tungsten Inclusions
File: BC85-592
Question: When the GTAW process is used to fabricate a vessel, are tungsten inclusions revealed
by radiography to be evaluated in accordance with the acceptance criteria of UW-51 or UW-52?
Reply: Yes for UW-51; no for UW-52.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-50. Welded Joint Examination
File; BC85-593
Question: Since SA-53 Type S and SA-53 Type E are identical in chemical and physical
requirements, can SA-53 Type E be used under the provision of Code Case 1518-2 if the longitudinal
weld zone is excluded for any openings?
Reply: No,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-85(b), Heat Treatment of Test Specimens
File: BC85-602
Question: May the test specimen requirements of UCS-85(b) be waived for flued openings in a shell
made by the following conditions?
(1) The vessel is not used to contain a lethal substance.
(2) The material is SA-576M Grade 415, and does not require impact testing.
(3) Diameter of shell is approximately 900 mm, and opening diameter is over one-third of the
shell diameter. The distance between openings is not less than 2.5 times the opening
diameter and nominal thickness of shell before forming is less than 10 mm. A nozzle is
welded to the formed opening. Reduction in thickness due to forming is compensated by the
reinforcement calculation for opening.
(4) Only the surrounding area of opening to be formed is preheated locally by using a gas burner
at 950°C-1100°C (above the lower critical temperature of material), and forming is done by
dropping the die immediately after preheating.
(5) All weldments of the vessel shell are sufficiently distant from the opening, and the
temperature of the weldments does not exceed the critical temperature during preheating for
forming. The vessel does not require postweld heat treatment.
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-86-46-238
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-25, Minimum Wall Thickness
File: BC85-605
Question (1): A vessel designed in accordance with UCS-25 and UW-12(a) or (b) has a wall thickness
less than 1/4 in. Must a corrosion allowance be provided for in-nozzle reinforcement and loading
calculations?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, what factors are used in determining the allowance?
Reply (2): Tr and Tm = the lesser of (t + 1/6) or 1/4 in.
Question (3): If the wall thickness is equal to or greater than 1/4 in., must a corrosion allowance be
provided in nozzle reinforcement and loading calculations?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-116, Marking Requirements
File: BC85-607
Question (1): May the marking requirements of UG-116(k) be varied for high volume produced
vessels?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May the marking requirements of UG-116(m) be varied for removable pressure parts of
high volume produced vessels?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-068
Question: Is heat treatment required for heads formed from P-No. 1, Gr. No. 1 or 2 material, when
the extreme fiber elongation is less than 40% and the conditions listed in (1) through (5) of UCS-79(d) do
not exist?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 1 and UG-32
File: BC86-069
Question: May a torispherical head under internal pressure be calculated according to Eq. (3) of 1-4
of Appendix 1 when L is greater than Do and L/r is between 1 and 16?
Reply: No.
File: BC86-079
Question: When calculating the area required for nozzle reinforcement under external pressure, is
the equation referenced in UG-37(c) used where the required thickness for external pressure is substituted
for tr and the equation is multiplied by 50%?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII-1, UG-90
File: BC86-086
Question: Must the Authorized Inspector examine surfaces (i.e., longitudinal and circumferential seams,
nozzle openings, etc., prior to welding (generally performed at fit-up inspection) on vessels that involve
cutting, and preparation f material edges during fabrication?
Reply. No.
Subject: Sections I, IV, and VIII, Division 1, Capacity Testing of Safety Valves Manufactured at
Separate Locations
File: BC85-489
Question: Is it permissible for a manufacturer to apply the test results of initial capacity certification
determined at one location in accordance with PG-69 in Section I (or HG-402.3 in Section IV, or UG-131
in Section VIII, Division 1) to valves of identical design manufactured by the same organization at a
different location?
Reply: Yes, provided the following conditions are met:

(1) Each manufacturing location has met the requirements of PG-73.3 in Section I [or HG-401.3
in Section IV or UG-136(c) in Section VIII, Division 1] and holds valid ASME Certificates of
Authorization for the "V" (or "HV" or "UV," as appropriate) Code Symbol stamp as a
manufacturer, issued to the same company.
(2) The manufacturer certifies to an ASME designee that the valve design is identical to the
originally certified design and that the same production drawings are used at each location.
(3) The manufacturer shall have and maintain a quality control system to assure that all Code
requirements shall be met. This system shall include provision to provide for the control of
drawings and specifications between each location.
(4) Valve nameplates uniquely identify the location of manufacture.
Note: This interpretation also appears as 1-86-23 and IV-86-11.
File: BC86-106
Question: Forged materials for the end caps of an accumulator were purchased, certified, and
accepted in 1983 under the provisions of Code Case 1 667-1. Since the purchase of the material, the
Code Case was annulled. Can these forgings be machined into finished end caps and used in the
assembly of an accumulator meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, after the expiration
date of the Code Case?
Reply: Yes, provided the purchase order for the vessels preceded the annulment date.
File: BC86-113
Question: May socket weld flanges, attached to nozzle necks by a single (hubside only) fillet weld,
be used in Section VIII, Division 1 fabrication?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UCS-56 and Table UCS-56
File: BC86-114
Question: Are the requirements of postweld heat treatment, as stated in UCS-56 and Table UCS-56,
based on design thickness or actual thickness?
Reply: The requirements for postweld heat treatment in Table UCS-56 are based on the nominal
thickness of the welded joint as defined in UW-40(f).
File: BC86-198
Question: Is the calculation procedure of 14-20 directly applicable to openings in the rectangular
vessels described in 13-2(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-125, UG-129(a), and UG-136(a), Liquid Relief Valves
File: BC86-199
Question (1): A relief valve is to be installed in piping attached to a vessel for the purpose of relieving
thermal expansion of liquid within a pressure vessel. Does the relief valve require a "UV" stamp?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does a relief valve for relieving expansion of water caused by ambient temperature
changes (ambient temperature less than 140° F) require a lifting device if operating temperature of the
vessel exceeds 140° F?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-200
Question (1); Can a welding procedure for manual SMAW joining P-No. 8 Gr. No. 1 to P-No. 8 Gr.
No. 1, DC reversed polarity, qualify for a double weld butt seam on pressure boundary material? The
first weld will not be back gouged to remove unfused metal (lack of penetration) of the weld prep land.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Can a welding procedure for automatic SAW joining P-No. 1 to P-No. 1 and P-No. 8 Cr.
No. 1 to P-No. 8 Cr. No. 1 qualify for a double weld butt seam on pressure boundary material? The first
weld will not be back gouged to remove the unfused metal (lack of penetration) of the weld prep land.
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Part ULW and Appendix D, D-1
File: BC86-201
Question: In the fabrication of multilayer vessels in accordance with Section VIII, Divisions 1 and
2, is it permissible to utilize a spirally wound design using strip and sheet material?
Reply: Yes, provided all requirements for layered vessels in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, are
met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; U-I(g)
File: BC86-211
Question: May a steam drum of an unfired steam boiler as defined in U-1(g) be stamped with the
"U" Code Symbol stamp if the purchaser or a jurisdiction waives the special requirements of UG-116(d),
UG-120(d), UG-125(b), and/or UW-2(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Fig UW-16.1 Sketch (v)
File: BC86-212
Question: May a configuration similar to sketch (v) of Fig. UW-16. 1, where the nozzle, is inserted
into a solid hub with integral reinforcement, welded to the vessel wall rather than directly into the vessel
wall, meet the requirements for openings and reinforcements in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UC-10(a)
File: BC86-218
Question: Material is being manufactured in accordance with ASTM A 519 Grade 4130 seamless to
meet the chemical and mechanical properties of ASME SA-372 Type 5, Class B, of Section II. The
material is produced to meet a forging specification, but does not go through a forging process. The SA-
372 specification requires a magnetic particle examination for all quenched and tempered forgings. Can
ultrasonic examination, in accordance with ASTM E 213, be used in lieu of magnetic particle
examination and have the material meet the requirements of UG-10(a)?
Reply: No.
File: BC86-234
Question: The shell of a vessel undergoes a rolling operation. A check of the alignment of the
longitudinal seam shows the plate was not sheared square. UW-33 and UW-35 do not cover
misalignment in which the longitudinal seam is not perpendicular to the circumferential joints. Can a
fabricator of a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel use a shell with such misalignment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Computer Programs
File: BC86-236
Question: Computer programs are being written for use in the design calculations for Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2 vessels. Does Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, require documented verification of such
programs that is to be made available to the Authorized Inspector?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; SA-312
File: BC86-237
Question (1): When using SA-312 welded pipe for a shell with no butt welded joints and no
radiography, must the allowable stress shown in Table UHA-23 be multiplied by 0.80 in UG-27 to
determine the thickness of the shell?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When using SA-312 welded pipe for a shell with no butt welded joints and no
radiography, must the allowable stress shown in Table UHA-23 be reduced in the UG-37 nozzle
reinforcing calculation?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-238
Question: Is it permissible to have a paint coating, not exceeding 2 mil in thickness, on a fine grain
blast cleaned, carbon steel pressure vessel at the time of the hydrostatic test required per UG-99?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG--16(c)
File: BC86-240
Question: A stainless steel pressure vessel is being fabricated with no corrosion allowance
specified. The plate material ordered is equal to the design thickness. Can the plate material be accepted
and used in the vessel with the mill undertolerance values given in UG-16(c) if the thickness is less than
required by the calculations of UG-27?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-12(c), Weld Detail
File: BC85-208
Question: Is it permissible to build a two-compartment pressure vessel meeting Section VIII,

Division 1 requirements, having a continuous shell, and both inner heads concave to pressure, attached by
fillet welds only to the inside of the shell? The space between the inner heads is vented to atmosphere.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketch (3), Hubless Plate Flange
File: BC85-228
Question: May the attachment detail illustrated in Fig. 2-4 sketch (3) apply to a hubless plate flange
calculated as a loose-type flange?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII 1-86-70
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4, Optional Type Flanges
File: BC85-230
Question: Do the dimensions for the groove and fillet welds between the flange back face and the
shell given in sketch (8) of Fig. 2-4 also apply to sketches (8a) and (8b)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-99, Hydrostatic Testing of Multichamber Vessel With
Vacuum
File: BC85-329
Question: A heat exchanger has a shell side design pressure of 150 psig, a channel side design
pressure of full vacuum, and a tubesheet design pressure of 164.7 psig (150 + 14.7 = 164.7 psig).
Will a minimum hydrostatic test pressure of 1.5 X 150 (Stest/Sdesign) for the shell side satisfy UG-99(e)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Sections I, IV, VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, and X, Authorized Inspection Agency of Record
File: BC86-230
Question (1): Do Sections I, IV, VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, and X permit a Code Symbol stamp holder to
concurrently have more than one authorized inspection agency of record at one location?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do Sections I, IV, VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, and X permit a Code symbol stamp holder to
use an Authorized Inspector employed by other than the AIA of record?
Reply (2): Yes; however, such a stamp holder shall have a quality control manual that defines how
this arrangement will be controlled and who is responsible for such activities.
Note: This interpretation also appears as 1-86-24, IV-86-18, VIII-2-86-5, and X-86-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4, Hubbed Flanges
File: BC85-464*
Question (1): Are the flanges in Fig. 2-4 sketches (7), (8), (8a), and (9) considered hubbed flanges due
to the attachment welds at the back of the flanges?
Reply (1): No, but the attachment weld may be considered as a hub in the design calculations.
Question (2): If the fillet weld at the back of the flange in Fig. 2-4(7) is removed, would this be
considered a hubbed flange?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-086*
Question: Is the Authorized inspector required to inspect all surfaces (i.e., longitudinal and
circumferential seams, nozzle openings, etc.) prior to welding (generally performed at fit-up inspection)
on vessels that involve cutting and preparation of material edges during fabrication?
Reply: No, however the inspector shall comply with UG-90(c)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-9(d), Radiography at Weld intersection
File: BC85-189
Question: UW-9(d) states: "Except when radiographed 4 in. each side of each welded intersection, .
" Does this apply only to the longitudinal joints on each side of the intersection with the circumferential
joint?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC86-251
Question: UW-27(b) allows resistance pressure welding to be used in the construction of pressure
vessels. However, resistance pressure welding is not one of the welding processes specifically addressed
in Section IX. Consequently, Article 11 of Section IX does not give essential, supplementary essential,
and nonessential variables for the resistance pressure welding process. Is it, therefore, the responsibility
of the vessel manufacturer to identify the essential, supplementary essential, and nonessential variables
for the resistance pressure welding process, and to use these variables in developing the Welding
Procedure Specifications and Procedure Qualification Records in accordance with Section IX?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-100(a)(2)
File: BC86-252
Question: Material specification SA-53 requires a hydrostatic pressure test on all pipe manufactured
according to that specification. UG-100(a)(2) allows the use of a pneumatic test in lieu of the hydrostatic
test for vessels not readily dried that are to be used in services where traces of the testing liquid cannot be
tolerated. May vessels manufactured according to Section VIII, Division 1, be constructed of pipe which
complies with all the requirements of material specification SA-53, except that the pipe has been tested
pneumatically at the test pressure specified in material specification SA-53, rather than hydrostatically, if
the pipe cannot be readily dried and if the vessel constructed of the pipe is to be used in services where
traces of test liquid cannot be tolerated?
Reply: No.

Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-12
Date Issue July 16, 1986
File: BC86-253
Question (1): Do UG-12 and UHA-12 allow the use of bronze bolts (SB-98, Alloy 651, 655, or 661)
with stainless steel nuts (SA-194)?
Reply (1): No
Question(2): Do UG-12 and UHA-12 allow the use of bronze bolts (SB-98; Alloy 651, 655, or 661 in
stainless steel flat heads with threaded holes (SA-240 Type 3162)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 1, 1-4(d)
File: BC86-254
Question: Does the inclusion of the formula for M override the limitations of UG-32(j) for
torispherical heads designed in accordance with 1-4(d)?
Reply: No.
Date issued: July 16, 1986
File: BC86-258
Question: Does the requirement of UG-1 19(c)(1) that the required nameplate marking of UG-116
shall be in characters not less than 5/32 in. high include letters and numerals such as "INT. PRESS
" "PSI " YEAR BUILT " and the manufacturer's name?
Reply: Yes, except as provided for pressure relief devices.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(b)
File: BC86-259
Question: Does U-2(b) allow a Certificate Holder to subcontract the welding of pressure parts to
another qualified shop provided all the controlling provisions of UW-26 and UW-31 are fully complied
with?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, PWHT of Seal Welds on Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints
File: BC86-268
Question (1): Is postweld heat treatment required for seal welds on tube-to-tubesheet joints on an all
carbon steel heat exchanger designed for low temperature service on the shell or tubeside?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is postweld heat treatment required for seal welds on tube-to-tubesheet joints in heat
exchangers in which the tubes are stainless steel and the remaining material is carbon steel? These heat
exchangers are designed for low temperature service on the shell or tubeside.
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC86-334
Question: May flux cored arc welding (FCAW) be used as a fabrication welding process for a
pressure vessel constructed in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-120 and Appendix W, Data Report Forms and Partial Data
Report Forms
File: BC85-320
Question: UG-1 20(c) requires that when Form U-2 or U-2A is used, it shall be attached to the
associated Form U-1 or U-1A by the manufacturer of the completed vessel. Is it also required that
information concerning materials, welds, etc., that has been recorded on Form U-2 or U-2A be repeated
on the associated Form U-1 or U-1A?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16(c)(2), Distance From Reinforcement Plate to Nozzle
Neck
File: BC85-465
Question: Do the rules of UW-16(c)(2) permit the use of a reinforcing pad that is not welded to the
adjacent nozzle neck?
Reply: No. The pad shall be attached by welds at the nozzle neck periphery if there is a nozzle
neck adjacent to the pad.
File: BC86-286
Question (1): A flange is welded to a nozzle in a vessel for lethal service. is the construction shown in
Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (m) permissible?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): A flange is welded to a nozzle in a vessel intended for lethal service. Is the construction
shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (7), (8), (8a), (8b), and (9) permissible?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-I(c)(5)
File: BC86-292
Question: The manufacturer is producing a compressed air distribution manifold of square cross
section. The smallest manifold is 6 in. by 6 in. with a 20 in. long chamber, the largest is 8 in. by 8 in.
with a 36 in. long chamber. Can this square tube be considered a piping component per U-1(c)(5) and
therefore outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided this equipment is generally recognized as a piping component.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16(f)(3)(a) and UCI-23(b)
File: BC86-293
Question (1): Is it permissible to attach a nozzle consisting of a pipe welded to an ANSI bolted flange
at one end and attached at the other end to a vessel, using a fillet weld deposited from the outside only in
lieu of using a threaded fitting as shown in Fig. UW-16.2 sketch (1), if the attachment meets the
limitations specified in UW-16(f)(3)(a) and is not designed for lethal service?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When designing a cast iron flange to Appendix 2, is it permissible to use 1 1/2 times the
allowable stress values in tension from Table UCI-23 for the allowable flange stress Sf?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(g) and Material Specifications
File: BC86-295
Question (1): May an unfired steam coil generator (boiler) be designed to Section VIII, Division 1, per
U-1(g) and follow the provisions of the Preamble of Section I?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to specify industrial quality nuts and bolts to fasten handhole covers and
immersion heaters on pressure vessels? The stress values of these fasteners will be derated to 80% of the
equivalent ASME listed national specification.
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-300
Question: May the minimum required thickness of the spherical portion of a torispherical head be
calculated in the same manner as a spherical shell?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-16 and Fig. UW-16.1, Nozzle Fillet Welds
File: BC84-169
Question (1): In Section VIII, Division 1 construction, is it acceptable to attach a nozzle neck that
projects past the inner vessel surface [similar to Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (h)] with a full penetration groove
weld and fillet weld on the outside only [similar to Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (c)]?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would the use of the inside nozzle projection as reinforcement require an inside fillet
weld?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-13 and Taper at Mismatch
File: BC85-225
Question: Is it the intent that any offset within the allowable tolerance provided in Table UW-33
shall be faired at a three-to-one taper?
Reply: Yes. See UW-33(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCI-101
File: BC86-235
Question: UCI-101(b) has been revised to require the average tensile strength from three test
specimens for use in the formula of UCI-101(a). Does the revision require retesting of designs based on
destructive testing with use of less than three test specimens made before the effective revision date?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-11(a)(3)
File: BC86-255
Question (1): Pipe fittings of the following sizes are to be welded to a thermowell:
(a) a coupling of 1/2 in. nominal size (1 1/4 in. O.D. and 2 in. length); and
(b) a coupling of 3/4 in. nominal size (1 1/2 in. O.D. and 1 1/2 in. length).
The thermowell is welded to the shell of a pressure vessel. Are these couplings considered to be "parts of
small size" per UG-11(a)(3)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are "parts of small size" as defined in UG-11(a)(3) required to have identifying marks?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC86-256
Question: Does UG-116 allow a Certificate Holder to list on his nameplate a geographical location
which is different from the company's physical plant location?
Reply: UG-116 does not list the company's geographic location as one of the required markings.
File: BC86-257
Question: Do U-1(c)(3) and/or U-1(c)(5) exclude from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1, the
following types of vessels?
(a) U-shaped screw conveyor having a flat cover and an internal conventional central helical
screw;
(b) cylindrical (or conical) screw feeder with internal central helical screw;
(c) chute or pipe interconnecting such a screw conveyor and screw feeder.
Reply: Manufacturers and/or users are responsible for classifying of pressure vessels and
determining if Code stamping is required. See U-1, footnote 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, 2-2(d,)
File: BC86-267
Question: Is it permissible to use a ring that has been cut or burnt from plate material as an optional
type flange without a machined hub?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-34 and UW-13
File: BC86-270
Question (1): A heat exchanger has a steam bell closure of irregular shape welded to its top. The steam
bell has end closures of flat plates without reinforcement that are attached as shown in sketch (h) of Fig.
UG-34. How should the long span D and the short span d be determined?
Reply (1): UG-34 is not applicable; the design should be per U-2 or UG-101.
Question (2): What E value of Table UW-12 is applied to Fig. UG-34 sketch (h) and Fig. UW-13.2 sketch
(c) if these details are used to attach the end closures described in Question (1)? The heat exchanger will
not contain lethal substances.
Reply (2): No E factor exists for an angle joint.'
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-and UG-77(c)
File: BC86-273
Question(1): A seamless formed head is to be furnished under the provisions of UG-11(b) and UG-
77(c) without a Manufacturer's Partial Data Report or part stamping. Cracks are found in the head after
forming, which require weld repair. Can this repair be considered a repair of defects in material subject to
the requirements of UG-78?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is a Manufacturer's Partial Data Report or part stamping required upon completion of the
weld repair?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)(7)(a)
File: BC86-301
Question: U-I(c)(7) exempts hot water supply tanks from the requirements of Section VIII, Division
1, provided the limitation given in that paragraph is not exceeded. For the purpose of satisfying
U-1(c)(7)(a), must the heat exchange take place inside the vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, Scope
File: BC86-313
Question (1): A Manufacturer's Certificate of Compliance on Form U-3 must be completed and signed
by the Manufacturer for each pressure vessel marked with the Code UM symbol. Since vessels fabricated
in accordance with U-1 are exempted from inspection, is the Inspector’s signature required on Form U-3?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): A vessel has an inside diameter of less than 6 in. and therefore is outside the scope of the
Code. If such a vessel can be fabricated in accordance with U-1(k), may it be stamped with the Code UM
symbol even though exempted from such stamping?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC86-317
Question: Frequently, nonreclosing relief devices are not available in small sizes (e.g., 1 in.
diameter) at set pressures less than I00 psig. If a small nozzle (e.g., I in. diameter) can be shown to be
adequate to prevent overpressure in accordance with UG-125, is it permissible to increase the pipe size
after the nozzle and install a nonreclosing relief device larger than the nozzle diameter?
Reply: Yes.
Date Issue September 24, 1986
File: BC86-320
Question (1): UG-77(a) and UG-99(a) use the phrase "when the vessel is completed" and completed
vessel." Are these terms used with the same meaning?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it acceptable to verify and record the required material markings from the vessel by a
method described in the Quality Control Manual, then perform operations, such as sand blasting, that
cause the physical markings to be lost on the vessel prior to hydrostatic testing?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): When small items are welded into the vessel and lose their identity (e.g., small couplings
where the final exposed surface is too small to record trace numbers), is it acceptable to verify and record
the markings by a method described in the Quality Control Manual after tack welding but prior to welding
over the required marking?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Must the coded marking described in UG-77(a) appear on the part or may alternate
methods described in the Quality Control Manual be used such as as-built sketches or tabulations?
Reply (4): Alternate methods that assure traceability may be used.

File: BC86-322
Question (1): For a bolted pad connection as shown in UW-16.1(p), may the drilled hole penetrate the
shell provided the requirements of UG-43(d) are met?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the measurement of one-fourth of the wall thickness from the inside of the vessel after
deducting the corrosion allowance to be taken from the tip of the apex from the standard drill bit, or is it
assumed to the distance resulting from the use of flat bottom drill?
Reply (2): The thickness of the remaining metal at the bottom of the drilled hole shall not be less
than one-fourth of the wall thickness measured from the inside of the vessel after deducting the corrosion
allowance.
Question (3): UG-43(d) states that drilled holes that are to be tapped shall not penetrate within one-
fourth of the wall thickness from the inside of the vessel after deducting corrosion allowance. Does this
mean one-fourth of the minimum wall thickness of the vessel shell or head, one-fourth of the minimum
thickness of the studded flange or plate, or one-fourth of the actual thickness of the studded flange or
plate that is used after the stud length requirements of UG-43(g) have been satisfied?
Reply (3): UC-43(d) requires the material thickness at the bottom of the hole to be 1/4 t of the total
thickness exclusive of corrosion allowance.
File: BC86-370
Question (1): A vessel being designed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, consists of a
cylindrical shell and dished heads complying with UCS-6(b)(1) through (4). Can structural steel
conforming to SA-36 and/or SA-283 be used for the shell and head of this vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): What additional inspection is required for such vessels described in Question (1)?
Reply (2): See UG-90(a).
File: BC86-372
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1, prohibit the use of welding and/or grinding of the
plate surfaces to meet the fit-up tolerances required of UW-33 and Table UW-33?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the plates at the joint are of different thicknesses, does the thickness difference need to
be considered as part of the alignment tolerance?
Reply (2): No. The abutting plates must be tapered to meet the requirements of UW-33 and Table
UW-33.
Subject- Section VIII, Division 1, UG-10
File: BC86-379
Question: Is it necessary to identify the manufacturer who produced material that has lost its
identifying markings before it can be considered acceptable under the requirements of UG-10?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UG-34 sketch (n)
File: BC86-381
Question: Is it permissible to fabricate a flat head in accordance with Fig. UG-34 sketch (n) from
SA-790 UNS S31803 or SA-789 UNS S31803?
Reply: No; however, see Code Case 1978 for other product forms.
File: BC86-447
Question: The design length of the vessel section L is diagrammatically shown in Fig. UG-28 as the
distance between schematically drawn bolted flanges. Does this length L apply if the bolted flanges are
loose type flanges per Fig. 2-4 sketch (1) or (1)(a), assuming the flanges meet the requirements of UG-29
for stiffening rings?
Reply: No.
File: BC86-448
Question: A vessel is designed to operate at a temperature below 20° F and impact tests are
required. UG-116(b)(1)(a) states that the words "minimum allowable temperature" are to be included in
the stamping. Can "minimum allowable temperature" be abbreviated "Min. Allow. Temp." in the
stamping?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC86-451
Question.- Die formed heads are being marked with the name or trademark of the head manufacturer
along with the markings serving to identify them with the accompanying material identification. May
these markings be applied to the head using a hand held vibrating engraver?
Reply: Yes.
Date issued: November 26, 1986
File: BC86-202
Question: Can a recognized abbreviation be used as the "name of the manufacturer" to meet the
marking requirements of UG-116?
Reply: Yes, provided the abbreviation is listed on the manufacturer's Certificate of
Authorization.
File: BC86-253*
Question (1): Do UG-12 and UHA-12 prohibit the use of bronze bolts (SB-98 Alloy 651, 655, or 661)
with stainless steel nuts (SA-194)?
Reply (1): No.
Question(2): Do UG-12 and UHA-12 prohibit the use of bronze bolts (SB-98 Alloy 651, 655, or 661)
in stainless steel flat heads with threaded holes (SA-240 Type 316L)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-31(d) and UW-33
File: BC86-512
Question: Are the requirements for alignment given in UW-31(d) and UW-33 applicable to the
corner joint shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (n) where the weld sizes are a + b= 3tn and tp = 1/4 in. or
greater and c = tn?
Reply: No
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Repairs to Formed Heads
File: BC86-513
Question (1): A formed head or segment of carbon or low alloy steel is to be supplied under the
provisions of UG-11(b) or UG-77(c) without a Manufacturer's Partial Data Report and part stamping.
Indications and/or under thickness are detected after forming which require welded repairs and/or welding
to restore thickness. The material is located at the plant of the head manufacturer where the repairs are to
be made. May the head or segment still be considered material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is agreement between the head manufacturer and purchaser all that is required to permit
weld repair or weld build-up per SA-20?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Does compliance with Section VIII, Division 1 require agreement from the Inspector
prior to effecting welded repair or weld build-up?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is the head manufacturer required to complete a Partial Data Report on completion of
weld repair or weld build-up to restore thickness?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Is part stamping by the head manufacturer required upon completion of welded repairs or
weld build-up?
Reply (5): No.
File: BC86-522
Question: A Manufacturer operates under the requirements of UG-90(c)(2) and runs a single 8 hr
shift per day, 5 days per week, using the services of one full-time Authorized Inspector. If the
Manufacturer adds a second 8 hr shift, is he required to employ a second Authorized inspector?
Reply: No. UG-90(c)(2) establishes that all Code requirements must be met, but does not detail
the method used to assure such compliance. The method must be developed by the Manufacturer and
accepted by the Authorized Inspector, the legal jurisdiction, and an ASME Designee. The need for an
additional Authorized Inspector will depend on the provisions of the quality control system and the
number of pressure vessels produced.
File: BC87-001
Question: What pressure is to be used when conducting pneumatic testing of cast iron or cast
ductile iron pressure vessels parts?
Reply: These materials are required to be hydrostatically tested in accordance with UCI-99.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, 3-1(b)
File: BC87-004
Question: For a horizontal vessel meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, must the
additional pressure due to the static head of liquids be considered when determining the thickness of any
specific part?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Backing Strips
File: BC87-005
Question (1): Are backing strips left in place after completion of the vessel considered to be material
subject to stress due to pressure?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are backing strips, whether removed or left in place, considered nonpressure parts, such
as skirts, baffles, and supporting lugs?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it permissible to use backing strips, whether removed or left in place of low carbon
steel plate, 1/8 in. thick, and not produced to a specification permitted in Section VIII, Division 1 without
any additional testing provided a qualified Welding Procedure Specification is available?
Reply (3): Yes, unless impact testing of the material is required.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-35 and Appendix 2
File: BC87-006
Question: A 1 in. flanged connection has been designed which meets the requirements of Appendix
2. When determining whether this design complies with UG-35, is it required that the connection be
provided with a minimum of four bolts?
Reply: UG-35 does not apply to multibolted connections.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Material Specifications
File: BC87-007
Question: Is it permissible to construct a pressure vessel in accordance with the requirements of

Section VIII, Division 1 using a material whose mill test report reflects dual certification, e.g., a material
test report certifying the material meets SA-106 Grade B, SA-53 Grade B, ASTM A 53 Grade B, and API
5L?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(i)
File: BC87-009
Question: Can a holder of a Certificate of Authorization for a U Code Symbol Stamp, with an
extension to field sites in the scope of authorization, assemble and test vessels to be stamped with the UM
Code Symbol Stamp at field sites?
Reply: No; see UG-116(n).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Electric Power Circuit Reclosers
File: BC87-018
Question: A Manufacturer produces a medium voltage automatic circuit recloser which employs
SF6 gas for internal insulation and arc interruption. The device normally operates at a pressure of 60 psi
and is capable of withstanding a pressure of 575 psi. Does this device fall within the Scope, of ,Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply: Yes; however, the need for determining if Code construction is required is the
responsibility of the user, manufacturer, or jurisdictional authority.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-20 and UG-21, Coincident Pressure and Temperature
File: BC84-598
Question: For establishing design conditions, may either the pressure or the temperature of a vessel
be considered to exceed the stamped conditions on the vessel data sheet or nameplate?
Reply: The pressure may be exceeded only for the conditions specified in UG-125. Under
normal operating conditions, the temperature may not be higher than the stamped temperature.
File: BC86-505
Question: Are the requirements of UG-99 pertaining to hydrostatic testing applicable to pressure
vessels made from UHT materials, e.g., SA-517 Grade E?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-074
Question (1): A vessel designed for operation at 50° F is to be fabricated using SA-333 Grade 6 for the
shell and SA-516 Grade 70 for the head. When performing the production impact tests for this vessel for
the Category B head-to-shell joint, is it required to use both materials when welding the test specimen?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would impact tests also be required for the heat affected zones of both materials?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-I(g)
File: BC87-071
Question: Is it permissible to construct a hot water heating boiler under the provisions of Section
VIII, Division 1, when the pressure vessel is not contacted by the fuel combustion (or flue gas) which
takes place in an adjacent and completely separate chamber? The vessel in question and adjacent
combustion chamber are in intimate contact and heat passes to the vessel by conduction through the
combustion chamber wall.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-019
Question: A pressure part requiring PWHT is being fabricated from P-No. 1 Group Nos. 1 and 2
materials in the rolled (not annealed) condition. In accordance with UG-85 and UCS-85, is a simulated
PWHT required for test specimens representing the materials used in this part?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC86-215
Question (1): Do pressure vessels stamped with the U Code Symbol Stamp require the use of pressure
relief valves stamped with the UV Code Symbol Stamp when such valves are chosen as the vessel
protective device?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Must pressure relief valves that are built in accordance with the requirements of UG-125
through UG-136 be stamped with the UV Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (2): Yes, when installed to protect a Code U Stamp vessel or vessels.
Question (3): May pressure valves not bearing the UV Code Symbol Stamp be used to protect pressure
vessels bearing the U Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(a)
File: BC86-285
Question (1): Does a vacuum furnace with a differential pressure of 15.5 psig to 85.5 psig and a water
flow water jacket fall under the exclusion of U-1(c)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Under the requirements of UG-28(e), would the minimum external design pressure for
the jacketed portion of the vacuum furnace be 85.5 psi?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Must both the vacuum furnace and jacket be marked with their oven MAWP's?
Reply(3): Yes. See UG-116(k) and 9-1(c).
File: BC87-043
Question: Does UG-14 prohibit the use of bored rolled bar as a means of producing the main body
of a pressure vessel?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-045
Question: Does application of the requirements of UG-90(b)(6) and the referenced paragraphs allow
a Certificate Holder to use what is known as a "conditional release" of material to fabrication when
material test reports are not received in a timely fashion so long as the Quality Control Manual provides
controls for this activity?
Reply: The Code does not specify at what point material test reports are to be verified with the
requirements of Section II material specifications.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(i)(3)(b)
File: BC87-046
Question (1): Several vessels are constructed of a combination of SA-517 Grades B and F material,
welded within a 3 month period at one location, plate thickness does not vary by more than 1/4 in. or 25%
(whichever is greater), and vessel production impact test plate is made from the combination of the SA-
517 Grade B and F materials only. Does this vessel impact test plate qualify as per UG-84(i)(3)(b) for
400 ft of joints between the SA-517 Grade B material to the SA-517 Grade F material if the same
procedure is used?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would this vessel impact test plate qualify as per UG-84(i)(3)(b) for 400 ft of joints
between the SA-517 Grade B to SA-517 Grade B material or joints between the SA-517 Grade F
provided the same procedure is used?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC87-079
Question (1): UG-97(a) states "When conditions permit entry into the vessel, as complete an
examination as possible shall be made before the final closure. When conditions do permit entry, what
must be examined?
Reply (1): UG-90(c)(1)(k) and (l) describe some of the required inspections and verifications to be
performed. Other inspections may also be necessary to assure the vessel meets all Code requirements.
Question (2): What types of examination are required to comply with UG-97(a)?
Reply (2): The Code does not specify what examinations must be performed; however, the Inspector
may require those examinations necessary to assure the vessel meets all Code requirements.
Question (3): May the manufacturer's manufacturing personnel perform the examinations required by
UG-97(a) or must the examinations be performed by the Manufacturer's QC personnel?
Reply (3): The examinations required by UG-97(a) are listed in UG-90(c)(1) as a duty of the
Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(k)
File: BC87-107
Question: A vessel is to be built with the following operational characteristics.

(a) The vessel operates at atmospheric pressure.
(b) The maximum water temperature is 180°F at or near the water outlet.
(c) The water enters the vessel via a spray nozzle and passes through a metal mist pad where it is
dispersed before raining through the products of combustion created by a fossil fuel flame.
(d) The heated water is utilized for heating/supply applications.
May such a vessel be constructed and stamped in accordance with the requirements of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The need for determining if Code construction is required is the responsibility of the user
or his designated agent.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116(m)
File: BC87-109
Question: Is the marking requirement of UG-116(m) met if it can be established that the
permanently marked removable parts have been manufactured to the Code by their identification (unique
number and/or letter codes), and traceable to the vessel through the manufacturing records which are
traceable to the assembly drawing identified in the Manufacturer's Data Report (U-1 or U-1A)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-112
Question: A seamless head, which has a required minimum thickness of less than 1/4 in. and is to
be used in compressed air service, is welded to a shell containing a longitudinal joint designed in
accordance with UW-12(c). No radiography is performed on any part of the assembly. Does UCS-25
require a corrosion allowance to be added to the required minimum thickness of the seamless head?
Reply: No. See Code Case 2009-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC87-113
Question: Is it required to use either magnetic particle examination or liquid penetrant examination
on the joint shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) when the flat plate is 5/8 in. thick and the value of Ts = 3/8
in. thick?
Reply: Yes; the extent of the examination for the joint shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) is
given in UG-93(d)(3) and (d)(4)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1, Indirect-Fired Storage Water Heaters
File: BC87-116
Question (1): For an indirect-fired storage water heater, does the heat input limitation in U-1(c)(7)(a)
mean the maximum heat input from the heat exchanger under maximum temperature difference and flow
conditions at a stored water temperature of 210°F?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would an indirect-fired storage water heater with a heat exchanger capacity of less than
200,000 Btu/hr be considered within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 when its heat source is a
heating boiler with input above 200,000 Btu/ hr?
Reply (2): No; however, the need for determining if Code construction is required is the
responsibility of the user, manufacturer, or jurisdictional authority.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCI-78(b)(3) and UCI-101
File: BC87-117
Question (1): In accordance with the requirements of UCI-78(b)(3), can mild steel drive plugs be used
to remove surface imperfections in a cast iron pressure vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When a pressure vessel is tested to destruction by the parent company, can a subsidiary
company manufacture an identical pressure vessel part without repeating the destructive test?
Reply (2): Yes, provided direct operational control is established in their quality control systems.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 sketch (8)
File: BC87-120
Question (1): When a hubless flange of the design shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (8) is designed as a loose
type flange, is the groove weld with a minimum depth of c required on the back side?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the design described in Question (1), may the back side fillet weld have a minimum
throat dimension of 0.7c?
Reply (2): No; however, the throat dimension may not be less than 1/4 in.
ERRATA
The following interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Interpretations Vol. 20, which includes
interpretations issued from July 1, 1986, through December 31, 1986.
Interpretation: VIII-1-86-139 (This printing error was corrected by errata)

File: BC85-152
Question: In UW-11(a)(4), 1986 Addenda, was the deletion of the reference to UW-11(a)(2)
intended?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-019*
Question: A pressure part requiring PWHT is being fabricated from P-No. 1 Gr. Nos. 1 and 2
materials in the as-rolled condition. Are simulated PWHT test specimens, in accordance with UCS-85(b),
required when the heat treatment during fabrication is limited to PWHT at a temperature below the
critical temperature of the steel?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-171
Question (1): Do the requirements of UCS-57 apply to nozzle pipe to nozzle flange butt welds where
the nozzle neither exceeds 10 in. nominal pipe size nor 1.125 in. wall thickness?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do the requirements of UCS-57 apply to nozzle pipe to nozzle flange butt welds when
the nozzle either exceeds 10 in. nominal pipe size or 1.125 in. wall thickness?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-27(a)
File: BC87-172
Question: Is it permissible to use electrogas welding to fabricate welded ferritic steel vessels
meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-161
Question: Would a pressure vessel in the configuration of a T consisting of 4 in. pipe meet the
exemption of U-1(c)(9) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes; however, the need for determining if Code construction is required is the
responsibility of the user or his designated agent.
File: BC87-165
Question: Does a tube in a tube ammonia desuperheater/water heater with no parts exceeding 6 in.
I.D. fall within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No; however, the need for determining if Code construction is required is the
responsibility of the user or his designated agent.
File: BC87-167
Question (1): Do the requirements of UG-40 allow the outer fillet weld joining the reinforcing element
to be located outside the limits of reinforcement?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the fillet weld is located as stated in Question (1), can the area of this weld be included
in calculations for required reinforcement?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC87-169
Question: A spiral jacketed vessel is to be fabricated with the following characteristics.

(1) The inner vessel has an internal volume that does not exceed 5 cu ft and a design pressure that
does not exceed 15 psig.
(2) Per zone, the jacket volume does not exceed 5 cu ft, the inside width of the cross section does
not exceed 6 in. and the design pressure exceeds 30 psig.
Are the jacket and inner vessel considered to be within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No; however, the need for determining if Code construction is required is the
responsibility of the user or designated agent.
File: BC87-158
Question (1): Is RT 4 the proper designation for a pressure vessel in which the longitudinal seam is
spot-radiographed and the circumferential seam is visually examined?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is RT 3 the proper designation for a pressure vessel in which both the longitudinal and
circumferential seam are spot-radiographed?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC87-159
Question (1): A 36 in. O.D., 6 ft high access opening with a blind flange is welded on the top
torispherical head of a pressure vessel. Three process nozzles are also connected to this neck. Shall this
neck be designed using UG-45(b)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): The nozzle neck described in Question (1) is attached to a 10 in. long stub which is
welded to the head of the vessel. The thickness of the stub is calculated using UG-45(a). Shall the
remaining neck be calculated using UG-45(b)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): The bottom section of the vessel has a reducing conical section. The small end of the
conical section is connected to a 4 in. O.D., 6 ft long sump. There are several process nozzles connected
to the sump. Is this sump required to be designed to UG-45(a)?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC87-162
Question: A pressure vessel is being built in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1 and has the following characteristics:
(1) the vessel will not contain lethal substances;
(2) the least nominal thickness at any butt joint does not exceed the thicknesses indicated in UW-
11(a)(2);
(3) the vessel is not an unfired steam boiler;
(4) there is no electroslag welding in the vessel; and
(5) the vessel design is based on joint efficiencies permitted by UW-12(a) and the radiography
requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(a) and (b) have been met.
Does this vessel satisfy the requirements of UW-11(a), and should it have RT 1 placed under the
Code Symbol?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-168
Question: Is it permissible to attach a nozzle to a shell as shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (h) if the
length of the nozzle wall projection beyond the inner surface of the vessel shell is zero?
Reply: Yes.
Date issued: September 22, 1987
File: BC86-194
Question (1): In Fig. 2-4 under optional flange, it is stated: "Loading and Dimensions Not Shown Are
the Same as for Sketch (2) for Loose-Type Flanges or (7) for Integral-Type." Is it correct to assume the
above statement means any dimensions not specifically given for optional flanges shall be taken from
either sketch (2) or (7) as appropriate?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is tn, as used in Appendix 2, the actual thickness or the calculated thickness of the shell
or nozzle wall?
Reply(2): 2-3 defines tn follows: “nominal thickness of shell or nozzle wall to which flanges or lap
is attached less corrosion allowance, in.”
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Total Weld Load
File: BC87-110
Question (1): Is equation W = [A - (d - 2 tn)(E, t1 - Ftr)]S correct for determining the total load carried
by the nozzle attachment welds for a nozzle with a nozzle neck inserted through the vessel wall?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Fig. UG-41.1 sketch (b) depict a nozzle detail with the nozzle neck abutting the
vessel wall?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCI-101
File: BC87-164
Question: The test to destruction required in UCI-101 can be terminated when the test pressure
reaches the point required to establish the maximum allowable pressure. If the vessel does not fail during
this test, may it be stamped and put into service?
Reply: The Code does not address the termination of the pressure test prior to failure and
subsequent use of the vessel.
File: BC87-166
Question: To satisfy the requirements of UW-12(d), should E = 0.85 be used to calculate the
thickness of a seamless head attached to a shell when both the longitudinal Category A joint and the
Category B head-to-shell butt weld are visually examined?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-175
Question: A pressure vessel has an inside diameter, width, height, or cross-section diagonal of less
than 6 in., a length greater than 6 in., and operates at a pressure of 800 psig. Is this vessel outside the
scope of Section VIII, Division 1, as given in U-1(c)(9)?
Reply: Yes; however, see footnote 1 of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-36(c)(3)(b)
File: BC87-183
Question (1): Does the phrase "not greater than 2 in. pipe size" in UG-36(c)(3)(b) refer to the outside
diameter of standard weight pipe (2.375 in.)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is a pressure vessel with a MAWP in the range of 70 psig to 150 psig considered to be
subject to rapid pressure fluctuations if the pressure in the vessel can be varied between 0 psig and
MAWP at a rate of up to 30 psi/min?
Reply (2): The Code does not define "rapid fluctuations in pressure."
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Proof Testing
File: BC87-189
Question (1): When conducting proof tests based on yielding using strain gauges, is the 0.2% limit on
permanent strain for steels applicable to areas with highly localized and secondary stresses?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When conducting the tests described in Question (1), are the strain gages to be located at
the most highly stressed parts or the most critical areas, but only in regions of primary stress?
Reply (2): Yes; see the Note included in UG-101(g).
File: BC87-190
Question: A single rupture disk has been chosen to provide overpressure protection for a vessel. In
accordance with UG-127, should the device be selected in such a manner that no point within the
design range of the bursting temperature-pressure curve for the disk exceeds the MAWP of the vessel?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 1, 1-8
File: BC87-191
Question (1): A reducer section, under external pressure, has excess thickness to meet the area of
reinforcement requirement without an additional ring (Ae, > Ar,).In this case, is it also required by
Appendix 1, 1-8 to meet the moment of inertia requirement at the cone-to-cylinder junction?
Reply (1): Yes
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, is it permissible to utilize the excess thickness (without
adding a ring) to meet the moment of inertia?
Reply (2): Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-11 and UW-12
File: BC87-192
Question (1): A Category B or C butt weld (not including those in nozzles or communicating
chambers) is to intersect a Category A butt weld in a vessel section or head or connects a seamless vessel
section or head. In order to satisfy the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b), a spot radiograph must be
included in the weld increment represented by the Category B or C weld. Where around the
circumference shall the spot radiograph be taken?
Reply(1): The location of the spot radiograph shall be in accordance with UW-52(b)(3).
Question (2): A vessel section with a Category A butt weld is to intersect a Category B or C butt weld
connecting a seamless vessel section or head. In order to apply UW-11(a)(5)(b) to satisfy UW-12(d) for
increasing E of the seamless component from 0.85 to 1.0, must the Category A butt weld be spot
radiographed (per UW-11(b)] as a minimum degree of radiography?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Case 2005
File: BC87-194
Question(1): Does Code Case 2005 require the pressure vessel manufacturer to obtain customer
acceptance to construct a pressure vessel over 12 in. and up to and including 36 in. diameter that will
utilize the threaded inspection opening for piping, instrumentation, or similar attachments?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Code Case 2005 require the pressure vessel manufacturer to install plugs of Code
material in the completed pressure vessel that will be shipped to the customer?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(j)
File: BC87-197
Question: U-1(j) exempts inspections by Inspectors (UG-91) for vessels meeting the requirements
of and marked with the UM Code Symbol Stamp. Does U-1(j) also exempt monitoring by an Inspector
(UG-91) for the Quality Control Programs of manufacturers which produce vessels meeting the
requirements of and marked with the UM Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply: Yes; however, see U-2(h) regarding the annual review by the Authorized Inspection
Agency.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, Restamping of Pressure Vessels
File: BC87-199
Question: A new pressure vessel (i.e., one which has never been placed in service) has been
stamped in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 Is it the intent of the Code that
the Section VIII, Division 1 stamp may be removed and replaced with a Section VIII, Division 2 stamp
provided it is demonstrated to the Authorized Inspector by the original Manufacturer that all the
requirements of Division 2 are met at the time of restamping?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-202
Question: Steam chambers operating at a pressure of 70 psi and a temperature of 302°F are to serve
as tire curing molds. Three ring shaped molds of the following dimensions are to be built:
(1) 0.47 in. wide by 14.17 in. wide;
(2) 4.45 in. wide by 1.18 in. high; and
(3) 6.14 in. wide by 0.98 in. high.
Do the three steam chambers described above fall within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-291
Question: Would an indirect-fired storage water heater whose heat input exceeds 200,000 Btu be
considered within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Code Exemptions
File: BC87-250
Question: May vessels exempt from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 based on the size
exclusions of U-1(c)(9) be stamped UM in accordance with U-1(j) and (k)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Allowable Stress Values
File: BC87-251
Question: A Manufacturer is fabricating a pressure part from an SA-266 Class 2 forging having a
specified minimum tensile strength of 70,000 psi. Tests on the material show the tensile strength of the
forging ranges between 66,000 psi and 69,000 psi. The dimensions of the part do not permit downgrading
the material to SA-266 Class 1. Is it permissible for Section VIII, Division 1 construction to use a forging
satisfying the chemical composition of SA-266 Class 2, but having a minimum tensile strength of 65,000
psi? An allowable stress of 16,250 psi will be used in Code calculations, and the lower value will be
noted in the Manufacturer's Data Report.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-119(g)(i)
File: BC87-255
Question: May the nameplate stamping requirements of UG-116 and UG-118 be satisfied as stated
in UG-119(g)(1) if the information is directly die stamped into a guard that is permanently welded to the
tank?
Reply: Yes.
Date issued: October 21, 1987
File: BC87-289
Question(1): When h = 2.5tn in UG-37, is tn of an inwardly projecting nozzle considered to be the

nozzle nominal wall thickness minus twice the corrosion allowance, since the inwardly projecting nozzle
neck is exposed to corrosion on both inside and outside surfaces?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If a reinforcing pad is used on the external surface of a vessel and 2.5 tn + te governs the
external limit of reinforcement parallel to the vessel wall, can this same limit be used on the inside
projection of the same nozzle or is h limited to 2.5tn?
Reply (2): The reinforcement limit is 2.5tn
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Record Retention
File: BC87-299
Question: Are Manufacturers of Section VIII, Division 1 vessels required to retain job files that
contain drawings, calculations, material test reports, and purchase orders after the Manufacturer's Data
Report has been certified by the Manufacturer and Authorized Inspector?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-79, Cold Bent, Small Diameter Tubing
File: BC84-170
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1 do the requirements of UCS-79 apply to bending pipe or tube?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, 2-2(d)(1), Use of Bar for Manufacture of Hubbed
Flanges
File: BC85-177
Question(1): Does Appendix 2-2(d)(1) permit the use of forged bar in the manufacture of hubbed
flanges if the axis of the finished flange is parallel to the long axis of the original forging?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Appendix 2-2(d)(1) permit the use of hot rolled bar in the manufacture of hubbed
flanges if the axis of the finished flange is parallel to the long axis of the original bar?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-23(c), and Division 2, Fig. 4-130.1, Thermal Expansion of
Piping
File: BC85-288
Question: Are loads caused by the thermal expansion of piping considered as causing a secondary
stress (self-limiting) when applying the rules of UG-23(c)?
Reply: The method to consider this type of loading and stress category is not given in Section
VIII, Division 1, although these loads are required to be considered according to UG-22.
File: BC86-247
Question: Is the gasket loading point equal to the outside gasket (contact) diameter less twice the
effective gasket seating width b for facing sketch (2) of Table 2-5.2 when bo is greater than 1/4 in.?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC86-417
Question: Heads having D/2h = 2 have equivalent torispherical properties of a torisphere of L/D =
0.9 and r/d = 0.17. Does a head with two distinct radii with these ratios, that is, designed in accordance
with UG-32(d), comply with the requirement of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-32(j)
File: BC87-302
Question(1): Does a torispherical head satisfy Code requirements if the inside crown radius exceeds
the outside diameter in the corroded condition but meets the requirement of UG-32(j) in the noncorroded
condition?
Reply (1): No; see Appendix 1-4.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) above is no, which paragraph of the Code should the
thickness of the torispherical head be calculated?
Reply (2): The torispherical head must meet the requirements of UG-32.
File: BC87-383
Question: Is it acceptable under the requirements of UG-43(e) to use threaded connections of less
than 1/2 in. pipe size in threaded holes in the wall of a vessel?
Reply: The Code does not address this subject; see U-2(g).
File: BC87-390
Question (1): When calculating the required thickness of a seamless shell attached with a corner joint to
a nonextended tubesheet as shown in sketches (a) through (g), or to an extended tubesheet as shown in
sketches (h) through (l) of Fig. UW-13.2, is the value for the joint efficiency equal to 1.0?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When a seamless shell is attached to a flange as shown in sketches (m) and (n) of Fig.
UW-13.2 or sketches (3), (4), and (8) of Fig. 2.4, is the value for the joint efficiency equal to 1.0?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): In reinforcement calculations, when both ends of the seamless shell are attached as
described above and no radiography is performed, would the value for the joint efficiency still be 1.0
when calculating the required thickness of a seamless nozzle attached to this shell?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC87-391
Question: UG-34(d) states that for sketch (k) of Fig. UG-34, the net cover plate thickness under the
groove or between the groove and outer edge of the cover plate shall not be less than
d 1.9WhG / Sd ³
Can this equation also be used for sketch (j)?

Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12(b) and (c)
File: BC87-073
Question: A vessel is comprised of a seamless shell with seamless formed heads, other than
hemispherical, all connected with Type 1 or 2 butt welds (see Table UW-12). The Category D welds are
corner joints. If the butt welds connecting the vessel sections and heads meet the spot radiography
requirements of UW-52, may a joint efficiency of 1.00 be employed in the calculations to determine the
shell and head thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UW-12
File: BC87-203
Question (1): A 72 in. diameter horizontal vessel with a 42 in. diameter vertical communicating
chamber is being designed in accordance with the Summer 1983 Addenda to the 1983 Edition of Section
VIII, Division 1. The Category D attachment weld between the main shell and the communicating
chamber is of the type shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (a) or (a-1), except that the only opening in the
main shell within the area circumscribed by the communicating chamber is comprised of several 4 in. to 6
in. diameter holes which allow flow from the main shell into and out of the communicating chamber.
Does the Category D joint as described fall under this scope of Table UW-12 where joint efficiencies as a
function of type of joint and degree of radiography are Code mandated considerations?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, does the lack of radiographic examination of the
Category D joint between the main shell and communicating chamber affect the joint efficiency of any of
the remaining welded joints in the vessel?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC87-245
Question (1): Does UW-12(d) permit the use of a value for E of 0.85 for calculation of thickness for a
seamless head when the longitudinal joint of the vessel shell is spot radiographed and the circumferential
joint attaching the head is not radiographed? The joints are made by different welders.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does UW-12(d) permit a value of 1.0 for E for calculations of thickness for seamless
ellipsoidal or torispherical heads when the vessel joints are spot radiographed except that the
circumferential joints attaching the heads are separately spot radiographed per UW-11(5)(b)?
(UW-11(a)(5)(b) see errata page 521) The longitudinal and circumferential joints are made by different
welders.
Reply (2): Yes
Question (3): In the case of multiple-duplicate vessels, does UW-12(d) require that every intersection
as described in Question (2) be radiographed?
Reply (3): No.
Errata
Volume 22
Interpretation
VIII-1-86-181 In third line of Question (2), correct UW-11(5)(b) to read UW-11(a)(5)(b)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Alternative Rules for Noncircular Vessel Design
File: BC87-381
Question: In designing noncircular vessels in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1, Appendix 13, may analyses which account for the effect of deformation to reduce stresses be
used instead of the Code rules?
Reply: No; when a design is one for which rules are provided, these rules must be used.
File: BC87-385
Question: A vessel contains a Category B joint joining two shell courses of 1/2 in. thick material.
This joint is fit up and butt welded with a 1/4 in, offset. The offset is corrected by adding additional weld
metal to provide a 3 to 1 taper. Does this joint meet the requirements of UW-33 and Table UW-33?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-387
Question: A heat exchanger with fixed tubesheets is being designed in accordance with Section
VIII, Division 1 and the TEMA standard. The heat exchanger is provided with a bellows type expansion
joint. May the bellows type expansion joint be attached by a full penetration groove weld to a tapered
transition on the shell in accordance with the requirements of UW-9? This tapered transition is integrally
part of the calculated portion of the bellows type expansion joint which is designed by the method given
in the EJMA standard.
Reply: No. See Appendix BB and Code Case 1177-9.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Form U-1
File: BC87-398
Question: A manufacturer produces a unique heat exchanger for which he wishes to use a computer
generated Manufacturer's Data Report Form U-1. The Form U-1 will be modified to be more applicable to
this unit. Would such a modified Form U-1 meet the requirements of the Code?
Reply: No. The arrangement and content of the form must be identical, without addition or
deletion, to the Forms shown in Appendix W of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 14, 14-10.5 and SA-193
File: BC87-405
Question (1): Maximum allowable working pressure of a pressure vessel may be determined as per
UG-101, by a proof test, in lieu of calculations. In 14-10.5, MAWP is stipulated to be the lowest pressure
established by proof testing and calculations, in accordance with UG-101. In this case, is it possible to
establish MAWP for pressure vessel designs fabricated as per 14-10.1(a)(1) (as shown in Fig. 14-10.2)
with proof test calculations per UG-101(m)?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If both calculations and proof tests are required for MAWP, does "plain plate" as
described in 14-10.5(b)(1) mean flat, unembossed plate?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): In Section VIII, Division 1, SA-193, Grade B7, the material is described as having two
different compositions depending on the diameter of the bolting, 1/5 Mo or 1/2 Mo content. In Section II,
SA-193, Grade B7 has only one molybdenum content range of 0.15% to 0.25% (i.e., 1/5 Mo); is this a
typographic error in Section VIII?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC87-424
Question: Stainless steel materials have been received from suppliers with dual markings and dual
certifications for 304/304L and 316/316L. Material test reports show that the material meets all the
chemical and physical requirements of Section II, Part A for the specific material. May this material be
used in the design and construction of both plain grade and low-carbon grade stainless steel vessels?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-425
Question: Can materials produced to a specification other than those permitted in Section VIII,
Division 1 and Section II (e.g., BS, DIN, etc.) be used in a Code stamped pressure vessel provided the
requirements of UG-10 are met?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-426
Question (1): When fabricating a carbon or low alloy steel vessel, does the Code require radiographic
examination to be done before or after PWHT?
Reply (1): The Code does not specify the order in which these procedures are to be conducted.
Question (2): Is the hydrostatic test the final step in the fabrication of welded vessels prior to the
application of the Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is it the Inspector’s duty to check the quality of gaskets used in bolted connections prior
to the hydrostatic test?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): What are the acceptance criteria for leaks from gaskets during the hydrostatic test?
Reply (4): The Code does not address a leak acceptance criteria.
Question (5): For purposes of hydrostatic testing, is the gasket considered part of the pressure vessel?
Reply (5): Yes.

Question (6): With the concurrence of the owner/user, is it permissible to use gaskets in the required
hydrostatic test that have physical characteristics similar to the gaskets used in the design calculations?
Reply (6): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix L, L-1, Example (6)
File: BC87-428
Question: In Example (6) of L-1, is it to be assumed that the spot radiography requirements of UW-
11(a)(5)(b) have been met for the Category B joints used to attach the seamless parts?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-313
Question(1): Is it the intent that the static head is to be considered in the design of horizontal vessels?
Reply (1): Yes; see U-2(a) and UG-22.
Question (2): Does Division 1 of Section VIII provide specific rules for considering this static head?
Reply (2): No; see U-2(g).

File: BC85-094B
Question: May a Non-Certificate Holder's welders be used in his shop, provided that they are under
the control and supervision of a Certificate Holder under the conditions and requirements of UW-26(d)
and UG-116(n)(1), to make weld repairs either on pressure parts in a new vessel or on new vessel parts
which are to be stamped with the ASME Section VIII, Division 1 symbol?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Geometric Scope for Piping Connections
File: BC85-222
Question: A nozzle for a piping connection to a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel consists of a nozzle
neck joined by a butt weld to a section of piping which is joined by another butt weld to a welding neck
flange. May the vessel Manufacturer include the section of piping and the welding neck flange in his
construction, but exclude the section of piping, the welding neck flange, and their joining welds from the
Scope of this Division?
Reply: Yes. See U-1(e)(1)(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85(b), and Division 2, AT-112
File: BC86-105
Question: If hardness testing is a requirement of the original material specification, do UCS-85(b)

of Section VIII, Division 1 and AT-112 of Division 2 require hardness testing to be performed on the test
specimens representing the material after heat treatment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Multichambered Vessels
File: BC86-361
Question: Under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, may a series of interconnected, nonisolable
(from each other) chambers be considered a single vessel for Code identification and stamping purposes?
Reply: Yes, provided the interconnecting components meet all the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix Z, Z-4
File: BC86-527
Question: Should the last term in Eq. (3) of Z-4 be changed from tan(((+ ) to tan ((- ) for a self-
energizing o-ring gasket since no gasket preload is required?
Reply: No. This term is a function of the direction of the friction force component at the hub-to-
clamp interface and not the gasket preload. See Fig. Z-3.1 sketch (c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCI-23
File: BC87-070
Question: Are Classes 45 and 55 specifically excluded in the scope of UCI-3(b)?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-108
Question(1): Under the requirements of UG-79(b), the adjoining edges of longitudinal joints of
cylindrical vessels shall first be shaped to the proper curvature by preliminary rolling or forming in order
to avoid having objectionable flat spots along the completed joints. What is an objectionable flat spot?
Reply (1): An objectionable flat spot is one that results in out-of-roundness in excess of that
permitted in UG-80.
Question (2): If an objectionable flat spot occurs after full welding of a longitudinal joint, may it be
rectified by rerolling?
Reply (2). Yes.
File: BC87-475
Question: Do the requirements of UW-9(d) apply to the joints of a hemispherical head fabricated by
welding?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-473
Question: A Manufacturer fabricates an essentially complete vessel consisting of a shell, heads,

manways, and fittings. Can this Manufacturer supply this essentially complete vessel as a pressure vessel
part, meeting the requirements of UG-120(c), to another Manufacturer who adds accessories, conducts a
hydrostatic test, and certifies the vessel in accordance with UG-120(a)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-486
Question(1): Are vessels in which steam is generated as described in U-1(g), except those known as an
unfired steam boilers, required to meet the special requirements of UG-116(d), UG-125(b), and
UW-2(c)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, who determines if a vessel as described in U-1(g) is
defined as an unfired steam boiler or one of the other "vessels in which steam is generated"?
Reply (2): See footnote 1 of the Introduction.

File: BC87-408
Question (1): Must the welded joints shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (b), (c), and (d) be examined by
full or spot radiography when the vessel in which they are included is subject to the full radiography
requirements of UW-11?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, are these joints required to be ultrasonically examined?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Do the welded joints shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (b), (c), and (d) belong to one of
the types of joints listed in Table UW-12?
Reply (3): No.
File: BC86-196
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 require volumetric examination to verify the extent of
defects revealed by visual examination for vessels fabricated under the provisions of UW-12(c)?
Reply (1): No. For welds which require only visual examination, the requirements of UW-38 apply.
Question (2): When radiographic examination is not required under the provisions of UW-12(c), can
radiographic examination be performed under a contractual agreement between the user and
manufacturer to determine the extent of a weld defect revealed by visual examination?
Reply (2): The Code does not prohibit contractual agreements between the user and Manufacturer
which address requirements in addition to those of the Code.
Question (3): If nondestructive examination in excess of Code requirements is performed by agreement

between the user and Manufacturer, what acceptance criteria should be applied?
Reply (3): If nondestructive examinations are performed in excess of Code requirements, the
evaluation of the results of such examination is beyond the Scope of the Code.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table UCS-56, PWHT of P-No. 5 Material
File: BC85-509
Question: According to Table UCS-56, is postweld heat treatment required when a strip of P-No. 5
material having a nominal thickness of 5/8 in. is welded to a tubesheet of P-No. 5 when a 1/2 in. fillet
weld joins them and a preheat temperature above 300° F is applied?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC86-378
Question (1): Is a threaded inlet connection connecting the primary pressure piping to the body of a
relief valve, and not contained within the external structure of the valve, considered to be part of the
nozzle under UG-136(b)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is a threaded inlet base, not contained within the external structure of the valve,
connecting the primary pressure piping to the body of the relief valve considered to be part of the body of
the relief valve?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC87-069
Question: A welded vessel is designed to operate at temperatures below -20° F and is exempt from
production impact tests since it meets the requirements of UHA-51(a) and (b)(5). Is this vessel to be
marked as required by UG-116(b)(1) or (2)?
Reply: No.
File: BC87-290
Question (1): Is postweld heat treatment required by Table UCS-56 for a 3/4 in. thick shell attached by
a groove weld to a 2 in. thick base using the weld joint geometry of UW-13.2(d)? All materials are P-No.
1 and the requirements of UW-2(a) and UCS-67 are not applicable.
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Same as Question (1), but the shell is 1 in. thick.
Reply (2): No.
File: BC87-429
Question (1): Charpy impact testing is being done on weldments in SA-240 Type 304 material intended
for low temperature service (below -20° F). In addition to meeting the lateral expansion acceptance
criteria in UG-84(c)(4)(b), is it also necessary to have the absorbed energy value exceed 75 ft-lbf as
required by UG-84(c)(2)(a)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the Charpy impact test described in Question (1), is the minimum absorbed energy
value for a standard test specimen (10 mm x 10 mm) 75 ft-lbf as required by UG-84(c)(2)(a)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC87-474
Question: Do UG-8(a) and footnote 3 allow the use of commercially produced SA-53 Grade B
(ERW) pipe, 30 in. and less in diameter, and SA-312 pipe welded without filler metal (without Partial
Data Reports) for shells and other parts of pressure vessels fabricated in accordance with Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-496
Question: Can SFA-5.1 E7024 covered electrodes be used to weld a pressure retaining joint for a
vessel to be built in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided the Certificate Holder has a Welding Procedure Specification qualified in
accordance with Section IX for the applicable joint geometry.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(c)(a)
File: BC88-007
Question (1): Is the "cross-sectional diagonal" measurement of U-1(c)(9) applicable to circular vessels
with attached circular nozzles?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is the "cross-sectional diagonal" measurement of U-1(c)(9) applicable only to vessels of
noncircular cross section?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): In applying the exemptions of U-1(c)(9) to vessels composed solely of circular
components, for example, a circular cylinder with attached circular inlet(s) and outlet(s), does the
diameter of the single largest component determine whether the vessel is exempt from Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is a vessel not exceeding 6 in. I.D., with a 3 in. I.D. inlet and outlet, exempt from Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply (4): Yes; however, see footnote 1 to U-1.
Question (5): Is a vessel consisting of a tee whose run and branch connections are less than 6 in. I.D.
exempt from Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (5): Yes; however, see footnote 1 to U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UW-31(d) and UW-33
File: BC88-008
Question: A vessel has been fabricated from carbon steel plate of 5/8 in. thickness for both the shell
and semiellipsoidal heads. After completing the circumferential seams, it is noted that the plate offset
does not meet the tolerances specified in UW-31(d) and UW-33. The offset varies around the
circumference from a minimum value of zero to a maximum of 1/4 in., with the shell being a smaller
diameter than the head. Is it permissible to add 1/4 in. of weld overlay in the inside of the head straight
flange to increase its thickness to 7/8 in., such that the maximum offset between the head plate and the
shell plate becomes equal to 1/8 in.?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-84(i)(3)(b)
File: BC88-010
Question: For the purposes of applying the requirements of UC-84(i)(3)(b), may SA-553 Type 1
and SA-353 be considered the same specification and grade of material?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-011
Question: Does the 3/32 in. thickness limitation established by UG-16(b) apply to an oil and
compressed air pressure vessel?
Reply: Yes,
File: BC88-027
Question: Under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2), is it permitted to fabricate multiple duplicate

pressure vessels on a regular set schedule which is less than 5 days per week provided the specific
schedule is maintained uninterrupted and acceptance is obtained from the Inspection Agency, legal
jurisdiction, and ASME designee?
Reply: The Code does not address this subject.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, 2-3
File: BC88-028
Question: Is it permissible to use the nominal root diameter of the thread to calculate the cross-
sectional area of a fully threaded bolt as defined in 2-3 for Ab?
Reply: Yes; see ANSI B1.1-1974 on Unified Screw Threads.
File: BC88-029
Question: Is "reduction in thickness due to the welding process" as used in UW-35(b) synonymous
with the term "undercut"?
Reply: Yes; see UW-35(b)(1) and (2) for the tolerances.
File: BC88-043
Question: Is it the intent of the new stress multiplier rules that, for a vessel consisting of an ERW
pipe shell with seamless ellipsoidal or torispherical dished heads and no radiography of the Category B
seams, the stress values from Table UCS-23 for ERW pipe be multiplied by E = 0.85 for calculations
involving circumferential stress in the shell?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC87-047
Question (1): Is the term "unfired steam boiler" in U-I(g) applicable only when the design pressure
exceeds 50 psi?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, must the vessel meet the other "unfired steam boiler"
requirements of UG-116(c) and UW-2(c)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66(d)
File: BC87-041
Question(1): May controlled-rolled plate material, with a thickness less than that for which
normalizing is required by the material specification, be used for vessels designed for service at
temperatures below -20° F if all the notch toughness requirements of UG-84 are met, and the material
manufacturer has certified the notch toughness as required by UG-84(d)(1)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May controlled-rolled plate material, with a thickness less than that for which
normalizing is required by the material specification, be qualified for use for the construction of vessels
designed for service at temperatures below -20° F in accordance with the provisions of UG-84(d)(2)
(1986 Edition with no Addenda)?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (l)
File: BC87-042
Question: Is the allowable circumferential stress requirement satisfied at the head-to-taper

intersection in the case of a hemispherical head, Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (1)?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not require a local stress evaluation of head-to-shell
transitions when the taper transition design complies with Fig. UW-13.1. See also UG-23(c).
File: BC88-048
Question: A 2:1 semielliptical head is hot formed by pressing at temperatures in the normalizing
range, from SA-516, Grade 70 plate 1.38 in. thick. Is it required that the head be postweld heat treated
after forming?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-049
Question: The 1987 Addenda contained a revision to UG-116(a) adding as required marking on the
nameplate the minimum design metal temperature at a specified pressure. Manufacturers are also required
to mark the maximum allowable working pressure at a specified temperature on the nameplate. Is it
permissible to combine the data required by UG-116(a)(3) and (a)(4) into one line of marking?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-051
Question (1): A bladder type accumulator has an opening for a "proprietary mechanical connection" for
external oil piping on one head and another for gas charging on the other head. In such a case, does the
first sealing surface as referred to in U-1(e)(1)(d) mean the surface of the head opening prepared for
sealing?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does U-1(e)(1)(d) exclude components constituting a proprietary connection beyond the
first sealing surface from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May hydraulic piston type accumulators be constructed and Code stamped in accordance
with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): If the reply to Question (3) is yes, may the piston which is movable within the cylinder
and which does not retain pressure in the sense of containment be exempted from the Code rules for
material and design?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UC-23(d)
File: BC88-053
Question: Does UG-23(d) permit the use of the 1.2 multiplier for the maximum allowable stress for
a general primary membrane stress when computing the wall thickness of a pressure vessel subject to
flood conditions?
Reply: The Code does not address this situation [see U-2(g)].
File: BC88-076
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UW-13(c)(1) and (2) to make use of the Type
1 or 2 head-to-shell attachment shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (D for shells larger than 24 in. in diameter?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Table (Tube) to-Tubesheet joints.
File: BC88-082
Question: When calculating the test efficiency of a tube-to-tubesheet joint according to the formula
given in A-4(a) for joint types a, b, c, d, and e, is it permissible to substitute L (test) for 0.8L (test) in the
numerator?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UB-6
File: BC88-083
Question: Do the requirements UB-6 prohibit the use of brazing filler metals which do not conform
to SFA-5.8?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-085
Question: If a reinforcement pad is used on the external surface of a vessel and 2.5(tn- Corrosion
Allowance) + te governs the external limit of reinforcement parallel to the vessel wall, is the limit to be
used on the inside projection of the same nozzle limited to 2.5(tn - 2 X Corrosion Allowance)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-086
Question: Is the reduction in minimum design metal temperature without impact testing per UCS-
66(b) applicable to rotating vessels?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-117
Question(1): Given that cap screws are machined from SA-354 Grade BD and are less than 1 in.
nominal thickness, are they exempt from impact testing when the vessels in which they are to be used
have a minimum design metal temperature of -20° F?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, and the operating temperature below +20° F will result
from seasonal atmospheric temperature, does the SA-354 Grade BD bolting require impact testing?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the reply to Question (2) is yes, is impact testing required for only the bolting material
and the test temperature need not be lower than -20° F?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-1(c)(8)
File: BC88-119
Question: Does a vessel containing water at pressures of 15 psi or less at temperatures up to 239°F
come under the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 for pressure vessels?
Reply: No; however, see footnote 1 of U-1.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-93(a)(2)
File: BC88-122
Question: Do the requirements of UG-93(a)(2) allow for cut lengths of pipe, such as SA-53 Grade
A or SA-106 Grade B, to be acceptable for Code use provided each piece is marked by the Manufacturer
or processor with the specification designation, including the grade, type, and class if applicable?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-1
File: BC88-123
Question: The design, materials, construction, and workmanship of filter tanks for pressure service
in the swimming pool industry is governed by the National Sanitation Foundation Standard 50. May a
vessel functioning as such be exempted from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: The Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 does not specifically exempt such a device; see
footnote 1 to U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Table UW-12
File: BC88-124
Question (1): The longitudinal joint of a vessel is fabricated as follows.
(a) A backing strip, which is to remain in place, is welded to the inner portion of the joint by the
SMAW process.
(b) The weldment is to be completed by two passes of the SAW process.
Is this joint considered to be a Type No. 2 joint in accordance with Table UW-12?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): The longitudinal joint of a vessel is fabricated as a double-welded butt joint. The inner
portion of the joint is welded using a single pass of the SMAW process, and the weldment is completed
by either one or two passes of the SAW process. Is this joint considered to be a Type No. 1 joint in
accordance with Table UW-12?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Fig. UW-16.1 Sketch (h)
File: BC88-128
Question (1): A vessel is being fabricated which is subject to full radiography. A nozzle is welded to
the shell as shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (h). Is this welded joint a Category D joint?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the weldment described in Question (1) a butt weld subject to the full radiography
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-22
File: BC88-137
Question: Can the photoelastic strain measurement method be used to evaluate the stresses resulting
from the loadings required to be considered by UG-22?
Reply: The Code does not specify how the loadings required to be considered by UG-22 are to
be evaluated.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UC-10
File: BC87-430
Question: A Material Test Report is received from a material manufacturer. The identification on
the certificate reads ASTM A 106 Grade B; however, the year of manufacture has been omitted. The
report details (mechanical/chemical properties) conform to the 1986 Edition of Section II, Part A, SA-106
Grade B. In terms of UG-10 can the vessel manufacturer endorse the report/certificate as follows:
"Identical to SA-106 Grade B 1986 with editorial differences only," with the concurrence of the
Authorized Inspector, and use the material in fabrication?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-2(h), Demonstration of
Quality Control System
File: BC84-268
Question: A Manufacturer uses rolled and welded plate as well as seamless pipe for vessel shells.
In this case, do the requirements of U-2(h) and UG-90(h) allow the Manufacturer to demonstrate his
system using only a vessel of seamless pipe construction, as long as the Manufacturer can show that the
full scope of actions required by the written description can either be implemented within his facilities or
that he has the necessary controls over the work performed by others (e.g., subcontracted services)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix P, Rounding of Data
Values
File: BC84-661
Question (1): When the specified minimum tensile and yield strength values for materials in Section II
and the 1983 SI Edition of Section VIII, Division 1 are not in agreement, which Code Section takes
precedence?
Reply (1): Section II.
Question (2): For purposes of determining conformance with a particular Section II material
specification, how are the calculated minimum tensile and yield strength values rounded?
Reply (2): In accordance with the individual specification of Section II.
Question (3): How are the maximum allowable stresses listed in Subsection C of the 1983 SI Edition
of Section VIII, Division 1 established?
Reply (3): The basis on which the tabulated maximum allowable stress values have been established
is in Appendix P. Rounding of these values is determined by the Committee.
File: BC87-160
Question: A pressure vessel is to be designed and constructed to Section VIII, Division 1 as a stock
item. Is the Manufacturer responsible for external nozzle loadings when these are unknown?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Flange Design
File: BC87-198
Question: A bolted flange connection is to be designed for an expansion joint on a pressure vessel.
Is it permissible to design the flange based on the actual longitudinal load transmitted by the expansion
joint instead of the full longitudinal pressure reaction load?
Reply: The Code does not provide complete rules to cover this design detail. See U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix 4
File: BC87-204
Question (1): A vessel is being designed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 2 to operate
continuously at a certain elevated temperature and goes through a startup-shutdown cycle less than 1 time
per year. Should the quantity 3Sm be based on elevated temperature alone or based on the average of
atmospheric and elevated temperature (i.e., the lowest and highest temperatures in the cycle)
Reply (1): The quantity 3Sm is determined in accordance with the requirements of Note (1) of Fig.
4-130.1.
Question (2): When considering peak stress in using the fatigue curves of Appendix 5 in Section VIII,
Division 1, do the temperature limits of 4-136.7 apply?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UW-16(f)
File: BC87-254
Question: Is it permissible to attach an unthreaded 3 in. pipe size or smaller nozzle, which is
inserted into or through the vessel wall, with a weld deposited from the outside only, as long as the other
requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a) are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-27(c)(1)
File: BC87-297
Question: A vessel shell is to be made from SA-53 Grade B ERW pipe. The vessel has dished
heads and no radiography has been performed. With regards to formula in UG-27(c)(1) and Table UCS-
23 Note (26), if the value of S taken from Table UCS-23 is 12,800 psi, is the value of E in the formula
equal to 1.0?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix Y-3
File: BC88-077
Question: Is there a formula for M and Q in Y-3 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Impact Testing
File: BC88-081
Question (1): May a vessel manufacturer perform impact tests of the base metal and heat affected zone
of each length of ERW pipe exceeding 1/2 in. thickness, for which the SA specification does not require
impact tests, and fulfill all the requirements of UCS-67 and UG-84(i) for impact testing?
Reply (1): Yes, the above impact tests would cover the qualification of both procedure and
production requirements.
Question (2): Must additional impact testing of the base metal and heat affected zones be performed on
each length of ERW pipe exceeding 1/2 in. thickness to meet the requirements of UG-84(i), if the material
was impact tested in accordance with SA-333?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Do the definitions for the governing thickness specified in UCS-66(a)(1) apply when
determining the thickness to be considered in UG-20(f)(2)? An example would be a corner joint of 1 1/2
in. plate and 3/4 in. plate with the weld penetrating through the 3/4 in. plate.
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UCS-66(c)
File: BC88-087
Question (1): May ferritic steel long weld neck flanges that comply with the design and rating
requirements of ANSI B16.5 be used at design metal temperature no colder than 20° F (-20° F see errata
page 421) without impact testing.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May pressure vessels that satisfy the requirements of UG-20(f)(1)(3)(4) and (5), but
pneumatically tested in accordance with Code Case 1518-2, be exempted from impact testing by UG-
20(f)?
Reply (2): No.

Errata
Volume 24
Interpretation
VIII-1-89-17 In Question (1), correct 20° F to read-20° F
Subject Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-119(e)
File: BC88-106
Question: A nameplate is attached in the following manner: a bracket designed to hold the
nameplate is tack welded to the vessel wall; the nameplate is slid into the bracket and held in place by
hammering the open ends. Does this method of attachment comply with the requirements of UG-119(e)?
Reply: No.
Note: A revised Interpretation follows.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-119(e)
File: BC88-106*
Question: A nameplate is attached in the following manner: a bracket designed to hold the
nameplate is tack welded to the vessel wall; the nameplate is slid into the bracket and held in place by
hammering the open ends. Does this method of attachment comply with the requirements of UG-119(e)?
Reply: This method of nameplate attachment will meet the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1, provided the removal of the nameplate requires the willful tampering or destruction of the
attachment system.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UCS-85
File: BC88-120
Question: A vessel made from P-No. 1 Group No. 1 or 2 material is to undergo two heat treatments
during fabrication, i.e., normalizing above the critical temperature and a postweld heat treatment. If the
coupon representing the material undergoes only the normalizing above the critical temperature heat
treatment, do the test results obtained from this coupon satisfy the requirements of UCS-85?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix AA
File: BC88-125
Question: The formula given in AA-4, Step 4 appears to be based on an equivalent round tube
bundle to calculate the tubesheet thickness for shear. If the actual tube bundle is not round, as in the case
of no tube in the window design, this formula may be excessively conservative. Is it permissible to
calculate the tubesheet thickness for shear under these circumstances using formulas which consider the
actual tube bundle shape in lieu of that prescribed by the above-mentioned formula?
Reply: AA-1 states that Appendix AA covers fully tubed circular tubesheets; for other types of
tubesheets, AA-6 refers to U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-84(h)(3) and UG-120(d)
File: BC88-134
Question (1): When procedure and/or production impact testing are required on material over 1 1/2 in.
thick and the material is not exempt from impact testing, are two sets of impact specimens from the weld
and heat affected zones required?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When impact testing (welding procedure and/or production impact test) is required for
parts, shall the minimum design metal temperature and the paragraphs of special requirements compiled
with, be shown on the U-2 or U-2A Data Report Forms?
Reply (2): Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-116(a)(1)(b)(4)
File-. BC88-135
Question: May the pressure vessel nameplate marking "minimum design metal temperature" as
required by UG-116(a)(1)(b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1 be abbreviated by the letters MDMT?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UCS-67(b)
File: BC88-142
Question: Is impact testing required for the welds in SA-53 Type E ERW pipe under the following
conditions?
(a) When the thickness at the weld exceeds 1/2 in. for all minimum design metal temperatures?
(b) When the thickness at the weld exceeds 5/16 in. and the minimum design metal temperature is
lower than 50° F?
Reply: Yes to (a) and (b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Fig. 2-4, Sketch (3a)
File: BC88-143
Question: When a hubless flange of the design shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (3a) is designed as a loose
type flange, are only two fillet welds with a minimum throat dimension of 0.7c required for the
attachment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix Z
File: BC88-164
Question: Are the design rules for clamp connections in Appendix Z applicable in the case where an
ACME type thread is used in place of the hub and clamp elements for the purposes of supporting the axial
loads and compressing the seal gasket?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UW-28 and UW-29
File: BC88-165
Question (1): Both sides of a shell and tube heat exchanger are built in accordance with Section VIII,
Division 1 (the shell side has a MAWP of 300 psig and the tube side has a MAWP of 850 psig). Are seal
welds connecting tubes to tubesheets or tubes to plugs considered to be within the Scope of the Code?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, do the requirements of UW-28 and UW-29 apply to the
welds described above?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-99(a)
File: BC88-175
Question: In UG-99(a), does the term completed vessels mean vessels on which no further welding
will be done after the final hydrostatic test?
Reply: Yes, but cosmetic grinding, machine operations, weld preparations, etc., which could not
be performed prior to the hydrostatic test, are acceptable operations.
File: BC88-175*
Question (1): In UG-99(a), does the term completed vessels mean vessels on which no further welding
will be done after the final hydrostatic test?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May operations such as weld end preparation, which could not be performed prior to the
final hydrostatic test, be performed after the test but prior to the signing of the Manufacturer's Data
Report?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC88-182
Question: According to the provisions of UG-15, may UNS S32304 plate conforming to the
chemical and physical properties, heat treatment requirements, and using the maximum allowable stresses
of SA-789, but otherwise conforming to the requirements of SA-240, be used under the rules of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-1(e)(1)(c)
File: BC88-189
Question: U-1(e)(1)(c) states that the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 is limited to the face of the
first flange for bolted, flanged connections where external piping is to be connected to the vessel. In the
case where a load bearing, pressure containing part (e.g., a textile dry can trunnion) is attached to the
vessel by a bolted flanged connection, does the Scope limitation of U-1(e)(1)(c) still apply?
Reply: Yes; however, see footnote 1 of U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Table UCS-56
File: BC88-192
Question: A P-No. 1 Gr. No. 2 plate has a specified nominal thickness of 1 1/2 in. It has a
measured maximum thickness which exceeds this value, but is in accordance with the tolerances
permitted in Table A1.1 of SA-20 in Section II, Part A. Is this plate exempt from postweld heat treatment
by Note (2)(a) of Table UCS-56, provided the preheat is performed as required by this Note?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-1(i)
File: BC88-201
Question: If a gas fired jacketed kettle is fabricated in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1,
does U-1(i) require construction in accordance with Appendix 19?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UW-28
File: BC88-202
Question: Do the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the use of the rules in either
Section III, Division 1, NX-4350 or Section VIII, Division 2, Article F-3 to be used to qualify a tube-to-
tubesheet welding procedure?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-245
Question: A welding neck flange is welded with a butt weld at the tapered end of the flange
extension to the pipe nozzle. Is this joint a Category C joint by location in UW-3(a)(3)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-246
Question: Footnote 2 to U-1(c)(6) allows the use of additives to water provided the flash point of
the aqueous solution at atmospheric pressure is 185° F or higher. Are additives which produce an aqueous
slurry of insoluble matter and otherwise meet the requirements of this footnote also permitted?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-250
Question: In Appendix 2, 2-3, dimension G is defined for all flange configurations with the
exception of the loose type with lap shown in sketch (1) of Fig. 2-4. Does the exception to the definition
of G given in 2-3 apply to sketch (la) as well as sketch (1)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-183
Question: In calculating nozzle wall shear for strength of connection elements, can the allowable
stress value of the nozzle be used even if this value is greater than the vessel wall allowable stress value?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-249
Question: When there is a corrosion allowance required on the inside surface of a vessel which has
inward projecting nozzle, are calculations to be made with both the nozzle wall and fillet welds in the
corroded condition?
Reply: Yes. See UG-16(e).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (b)
File: BC88-389
Question: A double full fillet weld joint of Type No. 4 of Table UW-12 is used to attach a
torispherical head to a cylindrical shell as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (b). The head has a thickness of
1 1/2 in., the shell has a thickness of 5/8 in. and the joint satisfies all the conditions of Fig. UW-13.1
sketch (b). Does the joint shown above meet the requirements of UW-13?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UF-30
File: BC88-411
Question: Are the provisions for localized thin areas in UF-30 applicable to integrally forged
vessels designed and fabricated in accordance with the requirements of Appendix 22?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Corner Joint Detail
File: BC87-218
Question: May a partial penetration weld be used to attach a shell, head, or other pressure part to a
forged or rolled plate to form a corner joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (q)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-I(c)
File: BC88-015
Question: Are water heating shell and tube, or tube in tube heat exchangers, within the Scope of
Reply: Yes, unless exempted by provisions of U-1(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UHA-51(b)
File: BC88-071
Question (1): Must the heat affected zone of a foundry performed repair weld on a CF3 pressure vessel
casting be impact tested per UHA-51(b)(4) and (6)? The casting is to operate at below -20° F and the
minimum thickness is less than 2 1/2 times the coincident pressure thickness.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are impact tests of the casting repair heat affected zone required if such repairs are
performed by the certificate holder?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Does the Code require separate heat affected zone impact tests for each welding process
used for such repair?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Does UHA-51(b)(5) require impact tests of deposited weld metal for all welding
processes?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UW-35(d)
File: BC88-080
Question: To meet the requirements of UW-35(d), is it permissible to determine root concavity or

convexity by radiography on welds requiring such examination when these conditions cannot be
determined by usual examination, provided the effects of weld reinforcement on the opposite face are
considered?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Fig. UCS-66
File: BC88-111
Question: Is SA-285 Grade C assigned to Curve A of Fig. UCS-66?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Jacketed Vessels
File: BC88-139
Question: Do the requirements of UW-2(c) for unfired steam boilers apply to kettle jackets in which
steam is generated as a result of heat from an electric immersion element but is not used at a location
external to the jacket?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-174
Question: Are the spiral case and stay ring of a hydraulic turbine excluded from the Scope of
Section VIII, Division 1 by U-(1)(c)(3)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Tubesheets
File: BC88-207
Question: May forged SA-105 blind flanges complying with ANSI B16.5 in pressure classes 150
through 600 be utilized as heat exchanger tubesheets for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-20(f)
File: BC88-212
Question (1): May the impact test exclusion be applied to either a multibolted or quick-opening closure
supplied as a Code stamped part for use on a vessel when the Manufacturer of the vessel satisfies the
requirements of UG-20(f)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, should this be noted on the U-2 Partial Data Report
Form?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the reply to Questions (1) and (2) is yes, may the impact test exclusion of UG-20(f) be
applied to quick-opening and multibolted closures built for stock if properly noted on the U-2 Partial Data
Report Form?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC88-221
Question (1): May a nozzle reinforcing ring be made from two pieces of plate and joined by a full
penetration butt weld?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are any further calculations required for the reinforcing ring described in Question (1)
beyond those required to ensure adequate reinforcement?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Must the orientation of the weld seams joining the two pieces of the reinforcing plate be
at right angles to the longitudinal axis of the vessel?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): May the weld seams joining the two pieces of reinforcing plate form an attachment with
the vessel shell or head?
Reply (4): Yes.
File: BC88-358
Question: Stress-relieved Monel tubes are supplied with annealed ends in accordance with an option
in the material specification. Since the allowable stresses of the two tempers are different, the tube wall
thickness will be based on the stress-relieved temper allowable stresses. The annealed area will be
limited to the portion of the tube contained within the tubesheet of a heat exchanger. The tubesheet
provides the necessary support for the annealed portion of the tube, the remainder remains in the stress-
relieved temper. Does the above satisfy the requirements of UG-23 and UG-27?
Reply: The Code does not address this subject.
File: BC88-363
Question: A vessel has been fabricated and hydrostatically tested, and the data report form has been
signed. During preparation for shipment an arc strike is detected on the vessel wall. The subsequent
grinding to remove the arc strike reduced the vessel wall thickness to a value below the calculated
minimum. In accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 the vessel does not require
PWHT. The thickness is restored by welding using a qualified welder and a qualified welding procedure.
The surface metal buildup is examined in accordance with UW-42. The Inspector was notified prior to the
performance of the repair. Must the vessel be hydrostatically tested again and a new data report form
prepared and signed?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UHA-51(b)(5)
File: BC88-375
Question (1): For a vessel constructed of Grade 304 material listed in Table UHA-23 and designed for a
MDMT of -100° F, does UHA-51(b)(5)(b) require impact testing at a temperature not warmer than the
MDMT per UG-84(h) for each welding procedure to be used in production, regardless of the welded joint
category?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): To satisfy the requirements of UHA-51(b)(5)(d) must impact tests be made on each lot of
SMAW electrodes to be used in production welding?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC88-387
Question (1): A Manufacturer is fabricating a cylindrical vessel with a seamless flat head welded to the
shell per Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d). The shell material is SA-240 Type 304 (P-No. 8), 1/2 in. thick, and the
head material is SA-515 Grade 70 (P-No. 1), 1 1/2 in. thick, not normalized. When determining the
thickness limitation for the flat head per UCS-66(a)(1)(b), must the P-No. 8 shell be considered to be the
same material as the head, thus requiring 1/2 in. to be plotted on Curve A of Fig. UCS-66 for the design
metal temperature of the head?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A cylindrical vessel is being manufactured with a stainless steel shell, stainless steel slip-
on flange attached per Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 sketch (3a), and a bolted carbon steel seamless flat head
without nozzles. The shell material is SA-240 Type 316 and 1/4 in. thick; the flange material is SA-240
Type 316 1 1/2 in. thick; and the head material is SA-515 Grade 70, 1 1/2 in. thick, not normalized. When
determining the thickness limitation for the bolted flat head per UCS-66(a)(3), must the stainless steel (P-
No. 8) shell material be considered to be the same material as the flat head, thus requiring 1/4 in. to be
plotted on Curve A of Fig. UCS-66 for the design metal temperature of the head?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-90(c)(1)(i)
File: BC88-390
Question: A vessel is being fabricated which requires one spot radiograph. Does UG-90(c)(1)(i)
require the Inspector to verify the required radiograph was made and the result is acceptable?
Reply: Yes
File: BC88-392
Question: Is it prohibited to completely fill with weld metal the slot and plug welds used for the
attachment of nondimpled/nonembossed jacket plates per Fig. UW-19.2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Appendix 1, 1-6
File: BC88-395
Question (1): For the dished covers shown in Fig. 1-6 sketch (d), is the term Hrhr to be included in the
total flange moment for the gasket seating condition?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): In the equation for the factor F in 1-6(g)(2), should the pressure be set to 0 for the gasket
seating condition?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UG-99(g)
File: BC88-412
Question: Vessels are produced to Appendix 22 of Section VIII, Division 1 and tested at pressures
exceeding 10,000 psi. May the water jacket volumetric expansion method and test apparatus described in
the Compressed Gas Association pamphlet C-1 be used in lieu of the requirements in UG-99(g), provided
all other Code requirements are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), UF-53
File: BC88-413
Question: Does UF-53 require the Inspector to witness selection, place identifying stamps, and
witness testing of these specimens? Test specimens would include required tests of SA-372 and Appendix
22.
Reply: No.
File: BC88-422
Question (1): Is a pressure vessel for refrigerant use defined by the tubes, tubesheets, and heads of a
shell and tube heat exchanger, where the heads have an I.D. greater than 6 in., within the Scope of Section
VIII, Division 1? The shell side of this vessel is not within the Scope of the Code per U1(c)(6).
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is Yes, is a multichambered pressure vessel for refrigerant
use defined in Question (1), where a divider in the heads is the common wall for two independent
refrigerant circuits, within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 if the overall diameter of the heads is
greater than 6 in. but less than 12 in.?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC88-423
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-10 for a steel service center/processor to
certify material to a specification recognized by Section II, Part A by using the chemical analysis
performed by the material manufacturer (the mill) and the physical test performed by the service center,
provided all test results comply with the particular Section II requirements?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UC-10(a) are met.
File: BC88-424
Question (1): Do the requirements of UW-16(f)(2) and (3) apply to internally threaded, externally
threaded, socket welded, and butt welded fittings?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A copper tubing adapter is machined to ANSI B16.22 from SA-106 Grade B Schedule 80
pipe. The full weight pipe is welded to the vessel with the machined end extending outside the weld joint
area for field brazing of copper tube. The material is identified under UG-8. In accordance with the
requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a), can this part be attached by a fillet weld from one side only?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC88-427
Question: Is the nominal thickness referenced in UG-20(f)(1) considered to be the same as the
nominal thickness defined in UCS-66(a)(1)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-428
Question: Are the requirements for postweld heat treatment given in Table UCS-56 applicable to
the welded joints of a pressure vessel fabricated from P-No. 1 material with a thickness of 2 1/4 in.?
These joints are welded with a flux-cored electrode, classified as E71T8-k6, which is resistant to
cracking.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-429
Question: A Manufacturer produces stainless steel pipes conforming to SA-312, SA-299, SA-358,
and SA-409. They are manufactured by one of the following processes:
(a) continuously formed, welded autogenously using the GTAW process, and solution annealed;
(b) continuously formed, welded autogenously using the GTAW process, cold drawn, and
solution annealed.
Would the maximum allowable joint efficiencies for these pipes be determined in accordance
with a Type No. 1 joint as shown in Table UW-12?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), Dual Stamping of Materials
File: BC88-437
Question (1): May products identified as dual grades be used as either grade in the construction of
pressure vessels built in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May products identified dually as TP 304/TP 304L be used above 1000° F as TP 304?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC88-439
Question: A vessel that meets the requirements of UCS-6(b)(1), (2), and (3) requires stiffening rings
per UG-29. May SA-36 plate over 5/8 in. thick be used for these rings?
Reply: Yes.
Subject:. Section VIII, Division 1, UW-12 and UG-81(a)
File: BC88-163
Question: The longitudinal seam of a vessel will be welded from the inside using the GMAW
process. After back-gouging and grinding, the seam is welded from the outside using the SAW process.
Is this joint considered to be Type No. 1 joint in accordance with Table UW-12?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-176
Question (1): May SA-312 welded pipe, conforming to one of the grades given in UHA-51(a) and
meeting all requirements of UHA-51, be used at a metal temperature between -20° F and -325° F without
Charpy impact tests?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May SA-403 WP-W or WP-WX 300 series, welded pipe fittings be used at a metal
temperature between -20° F and -325° F without Charpy impact tests?
Reply (2): See UHA-51.
File: BC88-193
Question (1): If plates that have been normalized, and qualified on the basis of test specimens taken
from the plates after normalizing, are subsequently heated to equivalent temperatures above the lower
transformation temperature during hot forming, are additional test specimens representative of the second
thermal cycle required by UCS-85?
Reply (1): No, provided all other requirements of UCS-85 are met.
Question (2): If plates supplied in the as-rolled condition with qualification based upon simulated
normalizing of test coupons are heated for forming to a temperature within a reasonable tolerance of that
used to qualify the test coupons, are additional test coupons required?
Reply (2): No, provided all the other requirements of UCS-85 are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-1 25(c)
File: BC88-386
Question: The 1962 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-125(c) states “All unfired pressure
vessels other than unfired steam boilers shall be protected by pressure relief devices that will prevent the
pressure from rising more than 10 per cent above the maximum allowable working pressure, except when
the excess pressure is caused by exposure to fire or other unexpected sources of heat." The comparable
paragraph in the 1986 edition, UG-125(c)(2), cites the exception to the 10% rule to be "exposure of a
pressure vessel to fire or other unexpected sources of external heat........” Is the exception to the 10%
maximum pressure rise rule in either the 1962 or 1986 Editions applicable to a process upset scenario
where a pressure increase results from heat caused by an internal exothermic reaction?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-459
Question: A pressure vessel was fabricated and hydrostatically tested, but the Data Report Forms
were not signed nor was the nameplate attached. Due to an emergency, the vessel was then used for 1 day
as an atmospheric storage tank, not as a pressure vessel. May the Authorized Inspector sign the Data
Report Form, and the Manufacturer apply the nameplates after the vessel has been used as described?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-467
Question: For a head or shell where the original plates thickness may be reduced from the nominal
wall thickness to a minimum thickness because of fabrication process, what is the shell wall thickness that
shall be used in determining the area available for reinforcement of an opening in accordance with the
formulas in UG-37.1?
Reply: The minimum specified thickness shall be used in the reinforcement calculations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UF-7
File: BC88-471
Question: Is the seal weld at the body/trunnion interface stated in SA-649 paragraphs 1.1 and 4.6 a
mandatory requirement for forged steel rolls manufactured to the specification and U stamped in
accordance with the requirements of UF-7?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC88-472
Question (1): Heads are being fabricated from materials listed in Section II by a gradual pressing and
spinning process. Does UG-79(a) require any mechanical testing to be performed to demonstrate the
properties of the material have not been unduly impaired?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it necessary to heat treat formed heads fabricated from carbon or low alloy steels?
Reply (2): See the requirements of UCS-79(d).

File: BC89-004
Question: Do the requirements of UG-10 allow a steel service center/processor to recertify material
to a permitted specification without furnishing to the customer a copy of the certification from the
material manufacturer (steel mill) containing the chemical analysis performed by the mill?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-66(c)
File: BC89-005
Question: Closure rings are used to terminate heating/cooling jackets on cylindrical vessels. While
these are not ANSI B1 6.5 ferritic steel flanges, they are designed in accordance with the requirements of
this Standard. Are these closure rings exempt from impact heating by UCS-66(c) if they are used at
temperature no colder than -20° F?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-016
Question: If a single working pressure is required or desired over a specified working temperature
range, is it permissible for the nameplate to state the following?
(a) A single "maximum allowable working pressure, PSIG" based on the lessor of a) the
maximum allowable working pressure at the maximum design temperature and b) the
maximum allowable working pressure at the minimum design temperature.
(b) "Working temps F max. and min." based on the specified working temperature range.
Reply: UG-116 and Fig. UG-118 set forth the requirements for terminology and dual marking
(appropriate abbreviations).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UHT-34
File: BC89-018
Question: For pressure vessel with hemispherical heads, constructed of UHT materials, with
reference to UHT-34 and Fig. UW-13.1 sketches (1) and (n), can the shell plate center line be on either
side of head plate center line.
Reply: Yes; see the note to Fig. UW-13.1 sketches (1) and (n).
File: BC89-027
Question: Can a Certificate of Authorization holder subcontract welding operations, within the
controls of UW-26, to a welding subcontractor who does not possess a Certificate of Authorization?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, SA-350
File: BC89-036
Question: May SA-350 be used as a tubesheet material in a heat exchanger to be fabricated and
stamped in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Form U-2
File: BC89-039
Question: In accordance with Note No. 47 of Table W-3, if the completed vessel is to be registered
with the National Board, does the U-2 (or U-2A) Partial Data Report Form require the Authorized
Inspector’s National Board Commission number?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-056
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 construction and certification, if nonmetallic, non-Code
tubes are used in heat exchangers of the fixed tubesheet, floating head or U-tube types, whereby the
operating pressure on the tube side is greater than the operating pressure, fluid and mix effects on the
shell side, but the shell and associated pressure relief devices are designed to withstand the highest design
pressure associated with the tube side, and the outside pressure boundary parts are treated as a single
chambered vessel making UG-19 inapplicable, may such a single chambered vessel be stamped as
complying with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-060
Question: A pressure vessel with an inside shell diameter of 42 in. has a 28 in. diameter circular
opening into which a nozzle will be inserted. This opening is located such that the limits of reinforcement
measured parallel to the vessel wall will extend to the dished portion of the head. Do UG-40(a) and (b)
permit the limits of reinforcement to extend to the dished portion of the head?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-064
Question: Do the provisions of UG-23 permit the bending stresses in the vessel wall due to
combination of pressure and earthquake/wind loadings to be ignored?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-009
Question: UG-133(d) states “Heat exchangers and similar vessels shall be protected with a relieving
device of sufficient capacity to avoid overpressure in case of an internal failure." What constitutes an
internal failure:
(1) tube leakage;
(2) tube cracking;
(3) tube break; or
(4) multiple tube breaks?
Reply: An internal failure is a condition that would lead to an overpressure of the pressure
boundary.

Subject Section VIII, Division 1, UG-116
File: BC89-046
Question: The marking required by UG-116 for a pressure vessel is to be applied directly to the
vessel in accordance with UG-118. When the vessel is registered with the National Board and the "NAT'L
BD" number is marked first and above all required ASME markings, is it acceptable to omit the
"manufacturer's serial number" [UG-116(a)(5)] from the fourth line of the required marking?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-046*
Question: The marking required by UG-116 for a pressure vessel is to be applied directly to the
vessel in accordance with UG-119. When the vessel is registered with the National Board and the "NAT'L
BD" number is marked first and above all required ASME markings, is it acceptable to omit the
"manufacturer's serial number" [UG-116(a)(5)] from the fourth line of the required marking?
Reply: Yes, provided this method of marking is in accordance with the Manufacturer's written
Quality Control System.
Note: This revision was inadvertently omitted from Volume 25 of the Interpretations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UHT-18(b), Recessed Nozzle
Inserts
File: BC85-600
Question: Do recessed nozzles machined from plate material and similar in detail to Fig. UHT-18.1
sketch (f) need to comply with Note (2) of Fig. UW-13.3?
Reply: No. Note (2) of Fig. UW-13.3 does not apply to this detail of construction; see U-2(g).
File: BC86-519
Question: Does UW-38 prohibit all visible surface porosity in welds?
Reply: The Code has no specific requirements in this regard. The Manufacturer shall establish
workmanship criteria consistent with the material and/or service requirements.
File: BC88-208
Question (1): Is a pressure indicating gage as described in UG-125(e) a mandatory requirement?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If a pressure indicating gage is installed per UG-125(e), what range should it cover?
Reply (2): The pressure gage should span the set pressure of the relief device and should have an
upper limit between 1.25 times the set pressure and 2 times the maximum allowable working pressure of
the vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Testing of NDE Personnel
File: BC88-354
Question (1): When a new edition of SNT-TC-1A is referenced by Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2,
must an employer revise his written practice to account for new or revised requirements in the new
edition?
Reply (1): No. These Sections of the Code reference SNT-TC-1A only as a guideline for
establishing the employer's written practice for qualification of NDE personnel; therefore, the
manufacturer should review new editions of SNT-TC-1A to determine whether any revisions effect the
written practice relative to the specific types of examinations being performed.
Question (2): If a written practice for qualification of nondestructive examiners is revised, must the
employer immediately requalify examiners in accordance with the revised practice?
Reply (2). No. Examiners shall be requalified as required by the employer’s written practice,
File: BC89-074
Question: Does UG-20(f)(1) permit only materials equal to 1/2 in. or 1 in. nominal thickness to be
exempt from impact testing or does it permit materials equal to or less than 1/2 in. or 1 in., respectively, to
be exempt from impact testing?
Reply: P-No. 1, Gr. Nos. 1 or 2 materials of nominal thickness of 1/2 in. or less listed in Curve
A of Fig. UCS-66 and 1 in. or less listed in Curve B, C, or D of Fig. UCS-66 are exempt from impact
testing, provided the requirements of UG-20(f) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Tube-to-Tubesheet Welds
Qualification
File: BC89-076
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 have requirements for the qualification of welding
procedures automatic welding machines with rotating heads set up specifically to weld tube-to-tubesheet
welds
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the use of either Section III, Division 1,
NX-4350 or Section VIII, Division 2, Article F-3 to qualify a tube-to-tubesheet welding procedure?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC89-078
Question: Are inspection openings required, per UG-46 of Section VIII, Division 1, in tanks
equipped with a heavy duty rubber bladder which is intended to prevent water from coming in contact
with the steel vessel? These tanks are used for expansion in heating systems.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-081
Question: Are the requirements of UG-90(c)(2) being satisfied when an AI inspects multiple
duplicate vessels for 4 hr on the day shift and 4 hr on the evening shift?
Reply: UG-90(c)(2) establishes that all Code requirements must be satisfied, but does not detail
the method used to assure such compliance. The method must be developed by the manufacturer and
accepted by the Authorized Inspection Agency, the legal jurisdiction, and the ASME designee.
File: BC89-082
Question (1): The owner's specification for a pressure vessel requires full radiography. The owner's
specification also allows the fabricator to fabricate the shell by using seamless or welded pipe
construction conforming to one of the specifications given in Section II. The pressure vessel fabricator
elected to make the cylindrical shell from welded pipe without filler metal. The pipe' was purchased by
the pressure vessel fabricator, and the whole length of the weld joint was not fully radiographed by the
pipe manufacturer. Is the pressure vessel fabricator required to fully radiograph the pipe?
Reply (1): The Committee cannot offer an interpretation of contractual responsibilities.

Question (2): Under what conditions is a pipe manufacturer or supplier required to furnish a Partial
Data Report in accordance with UG-120(c)?
Reply (2): See Note 3 to UG-8.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-11(b)
File: BC89-084
Question: A head manufacturer is supplied with a flat, circular welded plate by a Manufacturer
holding a valid Certificate of Authorization. This plate is delivered with a Partial Data Report as required
by UG-120(c). This plate is then formed by the manufacturer to the required shape. Must the head
manufacturer supply the purchaser with another Partial Data Report covering the forming operation or
may it be supplied in accordance with UG-11(b) with the Form U-2 or U-2A furnished by the
Manufacturer supplying the welded plate.
Reply: The formed head may be supplied in accordance with U-2(b)(2) with the Form U-2 or
U-2A furnished by the Manufacturer supplying the plate.
File: BC89-085
Question: An ERW pipe is butt welded to a 2:1 elliptical head forming a single full penetration joint
with a backing strip left in place or forming a butt joint as specified in Fig. UW-13 sketch (k). No
radiographic examination is conducted on the butt joint, and the pressure vessel will be used for internal
pressure without provisions for human occupancy. Is the joint efficiency E in the equations in UG-27 for:
(a) the circumferential stress equal to 1.00; and
(b) the longitudinal stress equal to 0.65?
Reply:
(a) No, a quality factor needs to be applied in this case.
(b) Yes.
File: BC89-111
Question: Is a Manufacturer required by the Code to provide the Inspector with a mill test report for
pipe which is to be used as the jacket or shell of a vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Code Case 1986-2
File: BC89-112
Question: Does Code Case 1986-2 limit the remaining wall thickness of a vessel to a thickness
which satisfies the requirements of UC-34(c)(2) and AD-702(a)(2) but not less than 0.25 in.?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This Interpretation also appears in Section VIII, Division 2 as VIII-2-89-06.
File: BC89-114
Question: If a vessel satisfies all the requirements of UG-20(f), may the vessel be stamped with
minimum design temperature of -20° F?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-116(e)(4)
File: BC89-115
Question (1): A two-piece, 2:1 ellipsoidal head is fabricated as a PART and fully radiographed to the
requirements of UW-51. Is the Manufacturer's nameplate marked "RT-1 " or "RT-4"?
Reply (1): The part should be marked "RT-4."
Question (2): A shell and tube heat exchanger is fabricated to the rules of this Division. The shell side
is radiographed to the requirements of UW-51. The tube side is radiographed to the requirements of UW-
52. Is the Manufacturer's nameplate marked "RT-4" or shell side "RT-I," tube side "RT-3"?
Reply (2): The vessel should be marked: shell side, "RT-1," tube side "RT-3"?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda); UG-116(e)(4)
File: BC89-115*
Question (1): A two-piece, 2:1 ellipsoidal head is fabricated as a part and fully radiographed to the
requirements of UW-51 in Section VIII, Division 1 Is the parts Manufacturer's nameplate marked "RT-1"
or "RT-4"?
Reply (1): Neither "RT-1" nor "RT-4" are required markings for parts. The required marking for
parts is found in UG-116(h)(1), (2), and (3).
Question (2): A shell and tube heat exchanger is fabricated to the rules of this Division. The shell side
is radiographed to the requirements of UW-51. The tube side is radiographed to the requirements of UW-
52. Is the Manufacturer's nameplate marked "RT-4" or shell side "RT-1", tube side "RT-3"?
Reply (2): The vessel should be marked: shell side, "RT-1", tube side "RT-3".
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Buried Pressure Vessels
File: BC89-117
Question: Mounded storage is a system in which cylindrical pressure vessels are laid in a prepared
bed or foundation, and an earth or sand mound is raised around and above the vessels. May the pressure
vessels used in such a system be manufactured and stamped in accordance with the requirements of
Section VIII, Division 1 or 2?
Reply: Yes; however, see footnote 1 to U-1 in Division 1 and footnote 1 to AG-100 in Division
2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Soft Soldered Joints
File: BC89-125
Question (1): May soft solder be used to attach extended heat transfer surfaces to the 'internal parts of
pressure vessels to be fabricated and stamped in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply (1): The Code does not address the use of soft solder.
Question (2): Are there any service temperature restrictions for the soft soldered joints described in
Question (1)?
Reply (2): The Code does not address the use of soft solder.
Question (3): May soft solder be used for the joining of pressure parts?
Reply (3): No.
File: BC89-126
Question: May electric resistance welded (ERW) pipe be used as nozzles in a pressure vessel whose
longitudinal seam is fully radiographed with no radiography on the longitudinal seam of the nozzles?
Reply: Yes, provided the reduced allowable stress for the ERW pipe is used in the calculations
for the nozzle, and there are no service restrictions per UW-2.
File: BC89-158
Question: Do the rules of UCS-66(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 require that the nonwelded end
plates of a plate and frame heat exchanger be Charpy impact tested per UG-84?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-169
Question: Is the material thickness requirement of 19-4(b) applicable to carbon steel piping and
tubing material used for heat transfer and water or steam circulation within the jacket when attached by
welding?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix 24, 24-2(e)
File: BC89-185
Question: Appendix 24, 24-2(e) states the minimum diameter for bolts and studs shall be 1/2 in.
On small clamped connections, a 1/2, in. diameter bolt appears to be oversized and creates mechanical
interference problems. Can a bolt smaller than 1/2 in. be used if calculations and/or testing proves a
smaller bolt is acceptable?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-188
Question: May a formed head with excess thinning be provided with a pad over the area of interest
to meet the required minimum thickness provided the following conditions are met?
(1) a butt or fillet weld procedure qualified in accordance with Section IX is in use;
(2) a telltale hole is provided on the pad; and
(3) the welding is performed by the vessel manufacturer.
Reply: No.
Date issued: July 7,1989
File: BC89-159
Question: Does a single welded circumferential butt weld without a backing strip comply with UW-
35 if:
(1) the joint has complete penetration and full fusion for its entire length with both surfaces free
from coarse ripples, grooves, overlaps, and abrupt ridges and valleys;
(2) the root of the weld groove falls below the adjoining surface with a smooth contour;
(3) the thickness of the weld at any point is at least equal to both the minimum required thickness,
and the nominal thickness of the thinner member being joined; and
(4) the thickness of the weld reinforcement on either surface does not exceed the requirements of
UW-35(d)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-167
Question: A vessel is to be fabricated from 24 in. diameter pipe and pipe cap ends having a capacity
of over 200 gallons. The vessel will receive steam condensate. Is this vessel outside the scope of Section
VIII, Division 1 per U-1(c)(5)?
Reply: No; however, see footnote 1 of U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Form U-1A
File: BC89-170
Question: Item 10 in Form U-1A of Appendix W is for nozzles, inspection, and safety valve
openings. Is it required that a fitting attached to a pressure vessel in accordance with UW-l6(f)(3)(a) be
listed, if used to attach a gage only?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), U-1(e)
File: BC89-186
Question: Is a clamp which fastens a piping component to a pressure vessel nozzle included in the
Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No; see U-1(e)(1)(d).
File: BC89-168
Question: Is it permissible to put a qualified seal weld over a pressure boundary weld sealing
bracket notched to clear a pressure boundary weld as described in UG-82(b)?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-90(c)(1)(i) and visual examination of the area of interest
are completed and acceptable to the Authorized Inspector before the seal weld is made.
File: BC89-044
Question: Must the portions of a partially jacketed vessel not enclosed or influenced by the jacket
be designed to Code requirements when the jacket pressure exceeds 15.0 psi, and the shell pressure is less
than or equal to 15.0 psi?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), U-1(e)
File: BC89-202
Question: Two vessels were fabricated by a Manufacturer in accordance with the requirements of
Section VIII, Division 1 and were stamped accordingly. Nozzles with weld end connections were
provided on the vessels. Are the field welds for the connections to these nozzles considered within the
Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No, see U-1(e)(1)(a).

File: BC89-204
Question (1): Are mechanically assembled plate type heat exchangers, using alternating layers of thin
heat transfer plates and gasket material, exempted from the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 if no
welding is used?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are material test reports [as per UG-93(a)(1)] required for the thin heat transfer plates of
plate type heat exchangers that are mechanically assembled without welding.
Reply (2): Yes, if the plates are pressure boundaries.
File: BC89-205
Question (1): Does UG-125(a) require pressure relief devices for the protection of water-containing
vessels fabricated and stamped in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 and having a design pressure
of less than 300 psig and a design temperature of less than 210° F.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2) : Does UG-125(a) require that protective devices must be designed, constructed, and
installed in accordance with UG-125 through UG-136 on all water-containing vessels, fabricated and
stamped in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, irrespective of size or pressure?
Reply (2): Yes.

File: BC89-207
Question: May breaking pin devices as described in UG-127(b) be used as the sole means of
overpressure protection provided these devices are tested and marked in accordance with UG-127?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-228
Question (1): Is a casting quality factor of 80%, as described in UG-24, applicable to pressure stressed
but not pressure containing quick actuating closures fabricated from SA-216 WCB castings?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the materials used in fabricating quick actuating closures to conform to a
specification given in Section II?
Reply (2): Yes; see UG-4(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-36(c)(3)(a)
File: BC89-231
Question (1): A vessel, not subject to rapid fluctuations in pressure, has a single nozzle whose neck is
made from 3 in.) XXS pipe (bore 2.300 in.). The vessel wall is over 3/.8 in. thick and the nozzle is
attached similarly to Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (j) (i.e., full penetration corner joint). Must this opening be
checked for reinforcement per UG-37?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the welded joint in the vessel described in Question (1) were changed to one similar to
Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (j) (i.e., not a full penetration corner joint), would UG-36(c)(3)(a) require that the
opening be checked for reinforcement per UG-37?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-28, UG-33; UG-80
File: BC88-121
Question (1): UG-33(i) addresses the length of a skirt on a formed head subject to external pressure; by
what rules is the required thickness of the skirt computed?
Reply (1): The skirt is considered a part of the vessel shell, and is included in the calculations
required by UG-28; for that cylinder.
Question (2): Except for conical heads and sections, is the formed head thickness calculated according
to UG-33 always adequate when the head is used as a stiffening point in the design of the cylindrical
shell, regardless of the distance to the next line of support along the shell?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): UG-80(b)(2) provides rules for the value of e when the points fall above or below the
curves of Fig. UG-80.1. There are no rules stated for Fig. UG-29.2 when the points fall below or to the
right of the curves. Is a value of Do/t = 10 to be used for values of Do/t less than 10, and a value of 0.390
Do to be used for points falling to the right of the 0.390 Do curve?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is the head skirt nominal thickness used as the value of t in fulfilling the requirements of
UG-80(b)(2)?
Reply (4): Yes.
Question (5): The symbol L is defined as, "(1) The distance between head-bend lines plus one third the
depth of each formed head if there are no stiffening rings (excluding conical heads and sections)." In this
definition, is a toriconical head considered to be a conical head rather than a formed head?
Reply (5): Yes.
File: BC86-380
Question: When designing a threaded hole in a vessel wall according to UG-43(e), may a National
Standard or International Standard for pipe threads other than ANSI B1.20.1 be used?
Reply: The Committee recognizes that its Codes and Code stamped equipment are used in
countries where thread standards other than ANSI B1.20.1 may be required. Thread standards which do
not conform to ANSI B1.20.1 may be used by agreement between User and Manufacturer under the
provisions of U-2(g) of the Code provided all other Code requirements for threaded connections are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Fig UW-16.1 sketch (g)
File: BC87-295
Question: Figure UW-16.1 sketch (g) in the 1986 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1 illustrates a
sloping transition from a thick to a thin nozzle wall where the change in wall thickness occurs along the
exterior profile, but does not indicate any limitations on the slope or on rounding or chamfering the
corners where the sloping part intersects the nozzle wall. Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit
a configuration as described from having an abrupt zero slope with sharp 90 deg. intersections with the
nozzle wall?
Reply: There are currently no explicit requirements.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, Jacketed Vessels
File: BC88-139
Question (1): Do the requirements of UW-2(c) for unfired steam boilers apply to kettle jackets in which
steam is generated as a result of heat from an electric immersion element but is not used at a location
external to the jacket?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does the requirement of UG-16(b)(4) for minimum thickness of shells and heads of
unfired steam boilers apply to kettle jackets made of austenitic stainless steel in which steam is
generated?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Can the external pressure charts, e.g., Fig. 5-UHA-28.1 or .2, be disregarded for a vessel
made of austenitic stainless steel which has had its properties changed by work-hardening during
fabrication and the MAWP established instead by a proof test in accordance with UG-101(p)?
Reply (3): No.

Question (4): Is the proof test at three times the desired MAWP in accordance With UG-101(p)
required for each and every vessel manufactured?
Reply (4): No; see UG-101(c) and (d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix Y
File: BC88-162
Question: Is it permissible to omit the force H, and moment arm hr in calculation for flange design
in Appendix 2 and Appendix Y of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC88-242
Question: Is it the intent that the full corrosion allowance of one-sixth of the required minimum
thickness as specified in UCS-25 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the steam-wetted external surfaces
of the 1 3/4 in. O.D. tubes in a Section VIII, Division 1 heat exchanger in which steam will be generated
by the use of heat resulting from operation of a processing system as described in U1(g)(2). The required
minimum thickness of the tubes is less than 0.214 in. not including corrosion allowance.
Reply: No.
File: BC88-430
Question (1): In a pressure vessel meeting the requirements of UG-20(f), the minimum design metal
temperature is 20° F and the maximum design temperature is 650° F. Will the SA-414 Grade G (any P-
No. 1 Gr. Nos. 1 and 2) material used for the cylindrical shell and formed head require impact tests when
they are less than 3/8 in. thickness?
Reply (1): No; see UG-20(f)(1).
Question (2): Is a reverse type SA-516 Grade 70 flange ring having a thickness less than 4 in. and
attached to the shell with weld detail as shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) exempt from impact testing?
Reply (2): Yes; see UCS-66(a)(1)(b) and UG-20(f)(1).
Question (3): Will a SA-516 Grade 70 bolted flat cover top closure plate having a thickness less than 6
in. require impact tested material?
Reply (3): No; see UCS-66(a)(3).
Question (4): Are the cap screws made from SA-354 Grade BD exempt from material impact testing?
Reply (4): No; see General Note (e) in Fig. UCS-66.
File: BC89-042
Question (1): Is the radial dimension from the inside of a cylindrical shell to the midsurface of a hollow
stay the pitch dimension to be used to determine the minimum thickness of a flat circular head stayed by a
single hollow tubular stay located at the center of the head?
Reply (1): Section VIII, Division 1 does not address this type of construction.
Question (2): Is the depth of the groove weld in Fig. UW-19.1 sketch (f) designated as tmin' determined
by the minimum thickness equation in UG-47?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Division 1 does not address this type of construction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Electrogas Welding
File: BC89-118
Question: Do all electrogas butt welds in ferritic steels and austenitic stainless steels require
ultrasonic examination, in addition to full radiographic examination required per UW-11(a)(6)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UHA-51(b)(5)(b)
File: BC89-127
Question: Are the requirements of UHA-51(b)(5)(b) applicable to the longitudinal weld seam in
SA-312 welded pipe of the type listed in UHA-51(a) that is to be used at a metal temperature between -
200° F and -325° F?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix 1, 1-2(a)(1)
File: BC89-151
Question: Is there in an inequality with the equations of Appendix 1-2(a)(1) and (a)(2) in solving
for Z when t is known and P is desired?
Reply: No, provided the correct radius and thickness are used.
File: BC89-160
Question (1): A vessel intended for cyclic service is designed using Article 4-2, Appendix 4 and
Appendix 5 of Section VIII, Division 2. The vessel is to be stamped in accordance with Section VIII,
Division 1. Is it mandatory that the fatigue analysis from Section VIII, Division 2 be prepared and
certified by a registered professional engineer?
Reply (1): The use of Section VIII, Division 2 to satisfy the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1
is a contractual matter, not a Code requirement.
Question (2): Is it permissible for the owner/user of a vessel to specify to the manufacturer that the
impact testing exemption of UG-20(f) not be used, but that the minimum design metal temperature and
impact testing exemption shall be as prescribed in UCS-66(a) and (b)?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC89-189
Question: A pressure vessel has been fabricated and stamped in accordance with the requirements
of Section VIII, Division 1 for a MAWP of 500 psi at 650° F. If the inside surface of the vessel is
insulated in such a manner that the metal temperature will not exceed 650° F, can the vessel be subjected
to gases or liquids at temperatures above 650° F?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-190
Question (1): May the water jacket volumetric expansion method and test apparatus described in DOT
49 CFR, Section I78.37 be used in lieu of the requirements in UG-99(b) and (g)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is "no," would the requirements of UG-99(g) be met if after
the water jacket volumetric expansion test is conducted at 5/3 the marked service pressure, the vessel is
removed from the jacket and inspected at a pressure equal to 6/10 the original test pressure?
Reply (2): Yes; see UG-99(d).
Subject: Subject VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UF-32(b)
File: BC89-206
Question: Do the requirements for radiograph, magnetic particle, and liquid penetrant examination,
postweld heat treatment, and of UF-32(b) and UF-37 apply to thermocouple attachment welds applied to
forgings after quenching and before tempering? The thermocouple attachment welds affect the base
metal to a maximum depth of 0.011 in., and these affected areas would be completely removed by
grinding prior to vessel fabrication.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-208
Question (1): Are the requirements of UG-77 for the transfer of material identification applicable to
nonpressure retaining material which is welded to pressure retaining material?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is "no," need any identification be transferred during
fabrication to individual pieces of nonpressure retaining material provided the material is identified at
receiving inspection in accordance with UG-93(a)(3)(a) or UW-5(b)(2) and the handling and storage
requirements of UG-93(a)(3)(b) are met?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-20(f)(1)
File-. BC89-209
Question: Is the nominal thickness used to consider impact testing exemption in UG-20(f)(1)
determined in accordance with UCS-66(a)(1), (2), and (3)?
Reply: Yes.
Date Issued- September 19, 1989
File: BC89-217
Question(1): May the exemption of UG-20(f) be applied for if a pressure vessel is constructed of P-
No. 1 and any other UHA or UNF material combination?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are the minimum design metal temperature requirements applicable to nonpressure
retaining attachments that are welded to pressure retaining parts?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC89-217*
Question: If a vessel is constructed of a combination of P-No. 1 Group No. 1 or 2 materials and

other materials listed in Subsection C, may the rules of UG-20(f) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to
the portion that is constructed of P-No. 1 Group No. 1 or 2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendices 1 and 5; UG-99(b)
File: BC89-218
Question (1): Es, Ec and Er are defined as the elastic moduli of different materials. May these values be
taken from ASME Code tables for elastic moduli, such as Section III, Division 1, Appendices Table E-6.0
and Section VIII, Division 2, Table AMG-2, or must the values be taken from the curves of Appendix 5?
Reply (1): The values for elastic moduli may be obtained from any recognized source and shall not
be taken from Appendix 5.
Question (2): UG-99(b) requires that the hydrostatic test pressure be determined by multiplying 1 1/2
times the design pressure by "the lowest ratio (for the materials of which the vessel is constructed) of the
stress value S for the test temperature on the vessel to the stress value S for the design temperature." Are
the bolts or loose flanges of a bolted joint which falls within the scope of the vessel included in the
materials for which the stress ratio is determined?
Reply (2): Yes:
File: BC89-224
Question: Is simulation heat treatment of test specimen required for specially designed cast or
wrought fittings in the nonannealed condition conforming to one of the specifications listed in P No. 1,
Gr. Nos. 1 and 2 of QW-422? The heat treatment during the fabrication process will be limited to
postweld heat treatment at a temperature below the lower transformation temperature for the material.
Reply: No.
File: BC89-229
Question: Are any of the impact test exemption curves of Fig. UCS-66 applicable to SA-372 Type
V Grade 1 Class B liquid quenched and tempered forgings.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-84(h)(2)(d)
File: BC89-235
Question: In UG-84(h)(2)(d) are the terms "steel making grain size" and "steel making practice"
identical?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-238
Question: Must the design loads, shear and bending stresses which are applied to a Section VIII,
Division 1 vessel's shell due to the reaction of damage protection devices attached to the vessel wall be
considered in determining the thickness and reinforcement requirements for the vessel?
Reply: Yes; see UG-22.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UW-12(c)
File: BC89-240
Question: A pressure vessel is made from ERW pipe. Flat plate end closures are attached as shown
in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (c). What stress multiplier is to be applied to the stress values obtained from
Table UCS-23 for ERW pipe for calculations involving circumferential stresses in the shell of the above
vessel?
Reply: An E factor of 1.0 is to be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (I986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-11(a)
File: BC89-242
Question: In accordance with UG-11(a) may manufacturer A manufacture standard pressure parts
(flanges) to manufacturer B's manufacturer's standard?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix 2 and UG-93
File: BC89-251
Question (1): Does 2-2(d)(2) prohibit the use of plate for the fabrication of optional type flanges which
have been calculated as hubbed flanges provided the plate satisfies the requirements of UG-93?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UG-93 specifically address the inspection of flanges fabricated from plate for all
types of flanges (except hubbed) without exemption to configuration?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May a flange be manufactured and subsequently welded into an assembly as shown in
Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (n) without further restrictions if made from plate material thicker than 1/2 in. which
has been properly PT inspected?
Reply (3): Yes, provided all other Code requirements are met.
File: BC89-255
Question: A Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel contains an inner chamber of proprietary
construction connected to the inlet and outlet openings in the outer chamber of the pressure vessel. The
outer chamber and the inlet and outlet nozzles are designed and constructed to contain the most severe
conditions of pressure and temperature of either the outer or inner chambers. The inner chamber is
designed for pressure and temperature conditions that are less severe than those for the outer chamber.
May the inner chamber be considered exempt from Section VIII, Division 1 requirements while the outer
chamber is rated and stamped as a single chamber pressure vessel complying with the Section VIII,
Division 1 requirements?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), SB-637
File: BC89-265
Question: May precipitation hardening alloy UNS N07718 sheet material be used in a pressure
vessel fabricated in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-304
Question: For reinforcement calculations done in accordance with the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1, is the material added for corrosion allowance to be subtracted from the thickness of the vessel
wall and added to the inside diameters of openings?
Reply: Yes; all dimensions used in calculations are in the fully-corroded condition.
File: BC89-278
Question (1): A Manufacturer holds a valid Certificate of Authorization permitting construction and
stamping of Code items complying with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1. The Certificate specifies the
Manufacturer's plant location "And Field Sites Controlled by this Location." The approved Quality
Control Manual has provisions for Field Operations with the requirement for Authorized Inspection
services. Are "Field Sites" limited to the location where the vessel will be installed and used?
Reply (1); No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is "No," is it permissible for the Manufacturer to activate an
idle shop facility on a temporary basis to construct and certify Code items under the provisions of U-2(i)?
Reply (2): Yes, with the approval of the Authorized Inspection Agency.
File: BC89-269
Question: A Manufacturer is fabricating cast iron pressure vessels from SA-278 material in
accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1. Neither UCI-3, Table UCI-23, nor SA-278
specifically address minimum temperature requirements other than the Table UCI-23 reference of
"Subzero to 450° F" for maximum allowable stress values, May the Manufacturer mark "Not Applicable"
for the minimum design metal temperature at a specified pressure on the Data Report Form and the
required marking for the vessel?
Reply: No. See UG-20 for the factors to consider in determining the minimum design metal
temperature at a specified pressure.
File-. BC89-275
Question: Do the words "a maximum allowable stress value of one-third the specified minimum
tensile strength of the material" in Appendix 22, 22-3 refer to the room temperature ultimate tensile
strength listed for the appropriate material in SA-372?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-281
Question: The Certificate of Shop Compliance on the Manufacturer's Data Report for Pressure
Vessels requires the signature of a representative of the Manufacturer. Does the responsibility of the
individual signing in this capacity extend only to his knowledge of the information contained on the Data
Report?
Reply: The Certificate of Shop Compliance is to be signed in accordance with the organizational
authority defined in the Manufacturer's Quality Control System Manual
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Part Modification
File: BC89-285
Question: A Manufacturer has moved locations and transferred parts of a vessel, without Partial
Data Report Forms, to the inventory of the new location. These parts include a vessel head with a flange
welded to it. The flange and weld are to be removed from the head and a new flange welded in its place in
accordance with Section VIII, Division 1. May the new assembly be stamped and considered as meeting
the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UCS-66(c)
File: BC89-312
Question: May integrally reinforced forged nozzles and studded outlet connections which comply
with the design and rating requirements of ANSI B16.5 be used at design metal temperatures no colder
than -20° F without impact testing?
Reply: No.
Note: A revised interpretation follows.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, UCS-66(c)
File: BC89-312*
Question: May integrally reinforced forged nozzles (except standard long weld neck flanges) and
studded outlet connections which comply with the design and rating requirements of ANSI B16.5 be used
at design metal temperatures no colder than -20° F without impact testing?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-I-89-156
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UW-2(c) and UG-16(b)(4)
File: BC88-052
Question: Do the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to an electric boiler constructed
under the provisions of PEB-3 of Section I?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-302
Question (1): Is it required to measure the size of an indication (bleed-out) for evaluation and
acceptance or rejection of imperfections detected by liquid penetrant examinations required by Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes; see B-4(d) of Appendix 8.
Question (2): Is it permissible to use techniques and/or definitions other than those contained in Section
V for Section VIII, Division 1 construction?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (d)
File: BC89-313
Question: A pressure vessel requires the installation and access for periodic maintenance of a large
diameter cartridge type internal. May the closure for the one end of the vessel be designed under the rules
for flat heads in Fig. UG-34 sketch (h) and UG-39(c) if the opening in the end closure is then closed with
a bolted flat cover plate with a compressible type full face gasket or compressible type gasket inside the
bolt circle meeting the rules for flat heads similar to those shown in Fig. UG-34 sketches (p) or (j)? The
requirements of UW-13, Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d), and UG-93(d)(4) are satisfied in the construction.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC89-331
Question: If a pressure vessel is fabricated without butt welded joints, using a shelf of electric
resistance welded pipe, and having end flanges per Fig. 2-4 sketch (3), (3A), (4), (4A), (8), (8A), or (9A),
should the joint efficiency of 100% be recorded on the U-1 Form, Line 7, per Note 24 of Table W-3.
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Tensile Strength
File: BC89-373
Question: To determine the MAWP of a pressure vessel meeting all requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1, may the tensile value given in the mill test report be used instead of the specified minimum
tensile strength given in stress tables in Subsection C?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Heli-Coils.
File: BC89-374
Question: A shell for a pressure vessel meeting all requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 has
been drilled to accommodate 48 head bolts and subsequently tapped for M24 metric bolts. These tapped
holes must be changed to accept 1 in.-8 UNC-2B bolts. May these holes be redrilled and a heli-coil
inserted to accept the correct 1 in. bolt? The heli-coil number is 1185-16CN 1500 and is made from 18-8
cold drawn stainless steel.
Reply: The Code does not address this detail of construction [see U-2(g)].
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UCS-85(d)
File: BC89-375
Question: A nozzle made from SA-335 Grade PS material with dimensions in accordance with
ANSI B36.10 is welded to the wall of a vessel. is simulated heat treatment of test specimens required of
the nozzle neck when the heat treatment of the vessel is limited to PWHT at a temperature below the
lower transformation temperature of the material?
Reply: Yes; see UCS-85(b).
File: BC89-438
Question: A Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel contains an inner chamber of proprietary
construction connected to the inlet and outlet openings in the outer chamber of the pressure vessel. The
outer chamber and the inlet and outlet nozzles are designed and constructed to contain the most severe
conditions of pressure and temperature of either the outer or inner chambers. The inner chamber is
designed for pressure and temperature conditions that are equal or less severe than those for the outer
chamber. May the inner chamber be considered exempt from Section VIII, Division 1 requirements while
the outer chamber is rated and stamped as a single chamber pressure vessel complying with the Section
VIII, Division 1 requirements?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1. (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-27
File: BC89-411
Question: Should the 12 1/2% undertolerance be used as part of footnote 15 in UG-27(c) when
determining the required thickness or design pressure?
Reply: No, the undertolerance is only a consideration when selecting the schedule of pipe to be
ordered after determining the required thickness.
File: BC89-413
Question: In the fabrication of a jacketed vessel in accordance with Appendix 9, a hole is drilled
through both the heads in which the outer head encounters excess material removal to facilitate nozzle
insertion. A patch is then placed around the nozzle, extending over the head base material and attached
using fillet welds. Is it permissible to place a patch over a drilled hole in which the patch extends beyond
and replaces the original base material, and attach this patch utilizing a fillet weld?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-414
Question: Is impact testing required if all conditions of UG-20(f) have been met except the design
temperature exceeds 650° F?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UW-51(a)(1)
File: BC89-415
Question: UW-51(a)(1) has been revised to require a Manufacturer to retain radiographs of a vessel
until the Manufacturer's Data Report for a vessel has been signed by the inspector. Can radiographs for
vessels fabricated prior to this revision to Section VIII, Division 1 be discarded or must they be retained
for 5 years as previously required?
Reply: The Foreword to the Code states: "After Code revisions are approved by ASME, they
may be used beginning with the date of issuance shown on the Addenda." Therefore, radiographs for
vessels completed prior to the date of issuance for the 1987 Addenda must be retained for at least 5 years.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Geometric Scope
Date issued: February 12, 1990
File: BC89-437
Question: Are the rules for the make-up connections described in U-1(e)(1)(b) of Section VIII,
Division 1 within the Scope of the Code?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UCI-101 and UCD-101
File: BC90-003
Question: May a Manufacturer ascertain the maximum allowable working pressure of a vessel or
vessel part made of cast iron or cast ductile iron by performing only a finite element analysis in lieu of
performing Code calculations or a proof test?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix 12, 12-3(b)
File: BC90-005
Question: 12-3(b) reads Other imperfections are unacceptable if the indications exceed the
reference level amplitude...Does the "reference level amplitude" refer to responses greater than 20% of
the reference level or 100% DAC reference level?
Reply: In 12-3(b) "reference level amplitude" refers to 100% DAC.
File: BC90-006
Question: In reinforcement calculations is the joint efficiency used in calculating the required
thickness of the vessel wall tr and the required thickness of the nozzle wall trn 1.0 regardless of the joint
efficiency determined for the vessel wall and nozzle wall from the rules in UW-12 provided the nozzle
does not pass through a weld?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Fig. UW-13.1
File: BC90-009
Question: Is the configuration shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f) meant to exclude the configuration
shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (e) for use with intermediate head construction?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-010
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-93 what documentation must the supplier of
cast materials supply with SA-278 and SA-S95 castings?
Reply: The marking requirements for SA-278 must comply with the requirements of UG-
93(a)(3), while SA-395 must comply with the requirements of UG-93(a)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Welded Attachments
File: BC90-012
Question: If the weld around a nonpressure part, either load-bearing or non-load-bearing, being
attached to a pressure part intersects the longitudinal or circumferential weld of a pressure part, must the
weld attaching the nonpressure part be interrupted at these intersections?
Reply: No [see UG-82(b)].
File: BC90-023
Question: A nozzle is welded to a seamless 2:1 ellipsoidal head as shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch
(g). Must this Category D joint be fully radiographed in order that a joint efficiency of E = 1.0 can be
used in the formulas of 1-4(c)?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-020
Question: Is a pressurized groundwood mechanical grinder where the pressure container is part of a
cylinder in which a hydraulic piston forces wood against a grinding stone exempt from Section VIII,
Division 1 by U-1(c)(3)?
Reply: Yes; however, see footnote 1 to U-1.
File: BC90-021
Question: May mirror symmetric vessels which meet the requirements of UG-120(a)(2) through (4),
and which are manufactured to the same drawing and completed on the same day be regarded as identical
and reported on a single Data Report?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), SA-105
File: BC90-224
Question: May forged SA-105 blind flanges complying with ANSI B16.5 in pressure Classes 150
through 600 be utilized as heat exchanger tubesheets for Section VIII, Division 1 construction provided
that both flange and tubesheet calculations are performed to verify that the thickness and bolting meet the
requirement of the Code?
Reply: No. (See para. 1.1 of SA-105 for scope limitation.)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-33 and UW-42
File: BC90-262
Question: Is it permissible to apply the requirements of UW-42 in Section VIII, Division 1 when
fitted butt joints in Categories A, B, C, and D deviate from the required tolerances given in UW-33?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC90-025
Question: May a flat plate used to form a corner joint be ultrasonically examined in accordance
with SA-435 in lieu of the magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination required by UG-93(d)(3)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-93
File: BC90-226
Question: Are material test reports in accordance with UG-93(a)(1) required for plate used as
reinforcement plates for nozzles in pressure vessels?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC90-236
Question: Does the term "flat plate" in UG-93(d)(3) refer to flat plate as rolled by the mill?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-115(b)
File: BC90-239
Question: Is it the intent that the word "certified documents" in UG-115(b) be applied to PQR's
(Procedure Qualification Record), WPQ's (Record of Welder Qualification Test), and CMTR's (Material
Test Report)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-32(g)
File: BC90-193
Question: Under the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, how is thickness determined for a
cone without a knuckle when the half-apex angle is greater than 30 deg.
Reply: See 1-5(g) and U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix 2, 2-2(d)(2) and Fig. 2-4 Sketch (11)
File: BC90-243
Question (1): Is a flat plate flange fabricated with the rolled grain perpendicular to the shell axis, which
is designed per the requirements of Fig. 2-4 sketch (11) of Section VIII, Division 1, and welded per the
requirements of Fig. UW-1 3.2 sketch (m) or (n) and inspected per the requirements of UG-93, considered
a "fabricated hubbed flange" as described in 2-2(d)(2)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is "No," then when performing design calculations for this
flange can the dimension h be taken as equal to the fillet leg parallel to the axis of the flange, and g equal
to the other fillet leg plus g when calculating the optional type flange using an integral type calculation?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Nominal Thickness Requirements to Comply
With PWHT Procedures
File: BC90-305
Question: In using the attachment detail of Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) in Section VIII, Division 1, can
the weld joint thickness of a shell to tubesheet attachment be considered the maximum metal thickness in
determining the rate of heating and cooling for postweld heat treatment?
Reply: No. See UW-40(f)(5)(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix 12, 12-3(b)
File: BC90-303
Question: Do the acceptance/rejection standards given in 12-3(b)(1), (2), and (3) of Appendix 12 in
Section VIII, Division 1 refer to imperfections which produce responses above 20% of the reference
level?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UW-29 and AF-210,
Mass Testing of Welders
File: BC88-426C
Question(1): In accordance with the subject paragraphs, can several contractors or assemblers
simultaneously conduct the performance qualification test(s) of a welder?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In accordance with the subject paragraphs, can a welder simultaneously weld
performance qualification test coupons in accordance with a welding procedure specification of several
contractors or assemblers when the essential variables are documented as identical?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Table UW-12, Backing Ring
File: BC90-306
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 to have an in-place
rolled backing ring with a tight fit in lieu of welding either edge?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Fig. UCS-66
File: BC90-261
Question: Does Curve B in Fig. UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to casting materials?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-11(a)
File: BC90-350
Question (1): Do Category D butt welds [e.g., Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (f-1) through (f-4)] require full
radiographic examination under the requirements of UW-11(a) and UW-12(a) in Section VIII, Division
1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do Category D corner welds [e.g., Fig. UW-16.1, all except sketches (f-1) through (f-4)]
require full radiographic examination under the requirements of UW-11(a) and UW-12(a) in Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May E = 1.0 be used in the formed head design formulas in UG-32 if Category D corner
welds are employed and all requirements of UW-11(a) and UW-12(a) are met?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-16(f)(3)(a)
File: BC90-359
Question: Do the requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 also apply to pipe?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-116 and UG-119
File: BC90-393
Question: Is it the intent of the marking provisions in UG-116 of Section VIII, Division 1 to allow
for both English and another language to be used when all of the criteria in UG-116 and UG-119 are met?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-345
Question: May alloy 317L (UNS S31703) be used in bar form (SA-479), pipe (SA-312), and tube
(SA-249) when the alloy is available under plate (SA-240) and fittings (SA-403), if all of the
requirements of UG-15 of Section VIII, Division 1 are met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-9(d)
File: BC90-400
Question: Do the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 set a limit on the number of longitudinal
seams permitted in a single shell or course?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-89-196 (Void see VIII-1-89-196R)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-36(c)(3)(a)
File: BC90-234
Question: Are strength calculations required in accordance with UG-41 for nozzles complying with
the requirements of UG-36(c)(3)(a)?
Reply: Yes, unless exempt by the provisions of UW-15(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-36(c)(3)(a)
File: BC90-234*
Question: Are strength calculations required in accordance with UG-41 for nozzles complying with
UG-36(c)(3)(a)?
Reply: No, except as required by UW-16(f)(2)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UHA-1
File: BC90-255
Question: Stainless steel materials have been received from suppliers with dual marking and dual
certification for 304/304H. Material test reports show that the material meets all the chemical and
mechanical requirements of Section II, Part A for the specific material. May this material be used in the
design and construction of both plain grade and high-carbon grade stainless steel vessels?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-10(a)(2)
File: BC90-294
Question: Does UG-10(a)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the recertification of SA-106
Grade B material to SA-106 Grade C by a vessel or parts manufacturer?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-20(f) and UCS-66
File: BC90-314
Question (1): May both UG-20(f) and UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 be used to establish impact
test requirements for vessels fabricated of two or more carbon steel materials?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A carbon steel vessel is made up of a 3/4 in. thick shell of curve B material and has 3 in.
thick welded flat covers also of curve B material. Can UG-20(f) be used for the shell material and UCS-
66(a) and (b) be used for the flat covers to establish impact test requirements for the vessel?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix 2, 2-4 and 2-13(a)
File: BC90-325
Question: A circular flat closure similar to that shown in Fig. 2-13 of Mandatory Appendix 2 is
connected to a shell by a welded attachment identical to that shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d). The
flange faces are not raised and the upper element is a blind flange. The ratio of outside diameter of the
flange to the inside diameter of the flange is equal to a K factor of 1.21. Is this construction permissible
under the requirements of 2-13(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 for K factors less than 2?
Reply: No, Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) is for tubesheets without the bolting flange.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix 2, 2-4 and 2-13(a)
File: BC90-325*
Question: A reverse flange as shown in Fig. 2-13 of Appendix 2 is connected to a shell by a welded
attachment identical to that shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d). The flange faces are not raised and the
upper element is a blind flange. The ratio of outside diameter of the flange to the inside diameter of the
flange is equal to a K factor of 1.21. Is this construction permissible under the requirements of
2-13(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 for K factors less than 2?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Table UW-12
File: BC90-326
Question: Is the joint thickness limitation per Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1 for Type 4,
Category B joints based on the shell thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-78, UW-40, and UCS-56(f), Repair of Steel
Castings
File: BC90-388
Question: Are defects repaired by a vessel or part Manufacturer in steel castings ordered to SA-352,
with Supplementary Requirement S4, subject to the requirements of UG-78, UW-40, and UCS-56(f) in
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), U-1(j)
File: BC90-257
Question: In determining the volume limit for a heat exchanger for exemption from inspection by
an Authorized Inspector per Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(j), is it required that the tube side internal
volume be the summation of the channel heads (or distribution headers) tubes, tube return bends, and
other miscellaneous pressure parts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-11(a)(2) and UG-44, Use of ANSI B16.5
Flanges
File: BC90-435
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-11(a)(2) and UG-44 in Section VIII, Division
1, can an ANSI B16.5 flange, using the rated pressure and temperature specified in the Standard, be used
without additional calculations per UG-34 and Appendix 2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1989 Edition), Appendix 2, 2-11 and AD-702
File: BC90-436
Question: Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 which allow the
determination of thickness for blind and reverse flanges under external pressure?
Reply: There are no specific provisions which address the design conditions described; see
U2(g) in Section VIII, Division 1.
File: BC90-439
Question(1): Do the requirements for unstayed flat heads in UG-34 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply
only to internal pressure?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 which allow the calculation of
minimum thickness for unstayed flat heads under external pressure?
Reply (2): There are no specific provisions which address the condition described; see U-2(g).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-102(a)
File: BC90-405
Question(1): Do the requirements of UG-102(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 mandate that the indicating
gage be physically located on the vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the requirements of UG-102(a) mandate that the indicating gage be physically located
at the highest point on the vessel?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-102(a)
File: BC90-405 *
Question(1): Do the requirements of UG-102(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 mandate that the indicating
gage be physically located on the vessel?
Reply (1): No. It shall be directly connected to the vessel with no intermediate valves.
Question (2): Do the requirements of UG-102(a) mandate that the indicating gage be physically located
at the highest point on the vessel?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC90-467
Question: Are reinforcing plates of nozzles having open telltale holes and meeting the requirements
of UW-15(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 considered pressure retaining parts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-32(o)
File: BC90-482
Question: Is it the intent of UG-32(o) in Section VIII, Division 1 that Formula (1) of UG-34(c)(2)
be used to calculate the maximum diameter of a flattened spot or surface on a torispherical, ellipsoidal, or
hemispherical head, where d would represent the maximum diameter, C = 0.25, and P, S, t, and E would
be as defined in UG-34(b)?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-116(e) and UW-12(d)
File: BC90-418
Question: Which of the marking requirements under UG-116(e) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply
for a vessel that consists of seamless ellipsoidal or torispherical heads when the vessel joints are spot
radiographed and after the circumferential seams attaching the heads are separately spot radiographed per
UW-11(5)(b)?
Reply:: “RT-3".
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-116(e) and UW-12(d)
File: BC90-418*
Question: Which of the marking requirements under UG-116(e) apply for a vessel that consists of
seamless ellipsoidal or torispherical heads when the vessel joints are spot radiographed and after the
circumferential seams attaching the heads are separately spot radiographed per UW-11(a)(5)(b)?
Reply:: RT-4
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-99(h)
File: BC90-480
Question: Is it mandatory that the metal temperature be 30° F above the minimum design metal
temperature during the hydrostatic test?
Reply: No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCS-56
File: BC90-493
Question: Is it required by UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1 to postweld heat treat attachment
welds joining austenitic bellows to pressure vessel shells of any size and thickness in P-Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5
when the bellows material thickness 1/8 in. and the attachment weld is made with austenitic weld
materials?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-493*
Question: Is it required by UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1 to postweld heat treat attachment
welds joining austenitic bellows to pressure vessel shells of any size and thickness in P-Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5
when the bellows material thickness 1/8 in. and the attachment weld is made with austenitic weld
materials?
Reply: Yes for P-Nos. 4 and 5, and no for P-Nos. 1 and 3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-37(d)
File: BC90-495
Question: Under the requirements of UG-37(d) in Section VIII, Division 1, is t used to calculate A
determined by the rules for external pressure?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-498
Question (1): Under the requirements of UG-120 in Section VIII, Division 1, must a parts
Manufacturer supply a U-2 or U-2A Manufacturer's Partial Data Report Form for heat exchanger tube
bundles which do not have seal welded or strength welded tube-to-tubesheet attachments?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Must tubesheets manufactured by other than the heat exchanger manufacturer be
supported by a U-2 or U-2A Manufacturer's Partial Data Report Form?
Reply (2): No, unless welding is performed during the fabrication of the tubesheet.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-43(d)
File: BC90-291
Question: Do the requirements of UG-43(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to tapped holes,
which do not penetrate any adjacent shell sections, in a reverse flange as shown in Fig. 2-13?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-399
Question: Under the requirements of UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division 1, must the hydrostatic test
temperature be a factor in determining impact test exempt criteria?
Reply: No. [See UG-99(h) regarding metal temperature during hydrotest.]

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCS-66(a)(3)
File: BC90-496
Question: Are lifting lugs, supports, ladder and platform clips, etc., exempted from the requirements
of UCS-66(a)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-2(b) and UHA-51(b)(5)
File: BC90-520
Question: For a shell and tube heat exchanger, where the material is of 304 stainless steel and the
tube side design temperature is -320°F, does the exemption provision in UHA-51(b) in Section VIII,
Division 1 void the requirements of UW-2(b) for weld joints?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Seal Weld for Corner Joint, Fig.
UW-13.2 Sketch (g)
File: BC88-466
Question: A noncircular pressure vessel is constructed with a corner joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.2
sketch (g). Does Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the use of a seal weld between welds a1 and a2 to form
a continuous sealing surface?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UW-16(f)(3)(a)
File: BC89-161
Question: A steel fitting is machined to ANSI B16.22 from SA-106 Grade B Schedule 80 pipe. The
fitting is welded to the vessel with the machined end extending outside the weld joint area for field
brazing of copper tube. If the requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 are met, can this
part be attached by a fillet weld from the outside only?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-13(b)(4)(c)
File: BC90-510
Question: Can radiographic examination, under the requirements of UW-51, be used as an

alternative for magnetic particle examination requirements in UW-13(b)(4)(c) in Section VIII, Division
1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-13(b)(4)(b)
File: BC90-522
Question: Is it the intent of UW-13(b)(4)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to allow the use of real time
radioscopic examination in lieu of magnetic particle examination for the longitudinal weld in the shell of
a pressure vessel after being offset and before the attachment of the heads or next shell)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), U-2(f)(3)
File: BC90-53S
Question: May a Certificate Holder of a U Code Symbol whose scope includes field extensions,
fabricate Code items at a facility owned or leased by the Certificate Holder which is not identified
as the primary location on Certificate of Authorization?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-116(e)(4), UW-11(a)(5)(b),
and UW-11(b)
File: BC90-543
Question (1): If a constructed vessel satisfies both the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) and UW-11(b)
in Section VIII, Division 1, would the required marking under the Code Symbol be "RT-4”?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it required under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 to indicate under Remarks
on the Manufacturer's Data Report that the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) have been met?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC90-544
Question: Are the requirements of UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to a carbon steel
base ring which is welded to a carbon steel support skirt, which in turn is welded to a vessel?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-545
Question: A continuous one piece clamp band similar to the cross-sectional view A-A of Fig. 24-1
in Section VIII, Division 1, but utilizing parallel bearing surfaces, is used as a holding element for
connecting a head to a cylindrical vessel or connecting two cylindrical vessel sections. The clamp band is
used with two hubbed flanges and is usually fitted with an over-center toggle to open and close the clamp
band so that a head may be opened as a quick actuated closure, meeting the requirements of UG-35.
Occasionally two bolts are used to hold the ends of the one piece clamp band together for infrequent
opening. Do the rules of the mandatory Appendix 24 apply to the above described clamp connections?
Reply: No. See U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-11(a) and Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (m)
File- BC90-412
Question (1): A one piece seamless pipe (SA-53 Grade B) is welded to a bolting flange at each end,
where the weld is of full penetration and forms a Category C corner joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.2
sketch (m) in Section VIII, Division 1. Assuming no radiographic examination is required by the Code,
would any radiographic examination of this corner joint affect the joint efficiency used in calculating the
required thickness for the seamless shell under internal pressure?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): With no radiography of this corner joint, would the joint efficiency of the seamless shell
used in calculations be E = 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Would the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) ever need to be met for the corner joint
described above?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-116(a)(4)
File: BC90-427
Question: For a vessel where the design pressure is used, as the maximum allowable working
pressure, can the value of the pressure corresponding to the minimum design metal temperature, as
required by UG-116(a)(4) in Section VIII, Division 1, be less than the design pressure?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition), UW-40(a)(5)
File: BC90-438
Question: Due to service conditions, a vessel is required to have PWHT in accordance with UW-
2(a) in Section VIII, Division 1, and the vessel's dimensions allow heating it as a whole in an enclosed
furnace. Is it permissible under UW-40(a)(5) to apply only local PWHT to the vessel and nozzle seams at
different times?
Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of PWHT for parts are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-13(b)(4)(b)
File: BC90-440
Question: For a shell where the longitudinal seam is welded from both sides and prepared prior to
offsetting, are the requirements of UW-13(b)(4)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 satisfied when after
offsetting, either magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination is performed on the outside of the shell
weld only?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), U-1(c)(3)
File: BC90-479
Question: May a vessel which is not part of rotating or reciprocating equipment, used to contain two
liquids under a differential pressure, separated by a floating piston be considered to be within the Scope of
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1-89-232 (Vois, see VIII-1-89-232R)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Table UCS-56.1
File: BC90-481
Question: May interpolation be used between temperature values listed in Table UCS-56.1 in
Section VIII, Division 1 to arrive at minimum holding time at the decreased temperature?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-89-232R (See errata on page 500)

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Table UCS-56.1
Date Issued: September 27, 1990 (January 3, 1991)
File: BC90-481*
Question: May interpolation be used between temperature values listed in Table UCS-56.1 in
Section VIII, Division 1 to arrive at minimum holding time at the decreased temperature?
Reply: Yes.
Errata
Volume 28
Interpretation
VIII-1-89-232R Correct Date Issued to read January 3, 1991
File: BC90-490
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-37 in Section VIII, Division 1 to use ·a
nominal head thickness t when calculating A (A1 By errata, page 670) for openings in heads?
Reply: Yes.
Errata
Volume 28
Interpretation
VIII-1-89-233 In the second line of the Question, correct A to read A1
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-120(c)
File: BC90-497
Question: Under the requirements of UG-120(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 must a parts
Manufacturer supply the original Partial Data Report Form U-2 or U-2A as one of the two forms required
to be furnished to the vessel Manufacturer?
Reply: No; however the original may be required for vessel registration.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), U-1(j)
File: BC90-534
Question(1): In determining the volume limit for the shell side of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger
under the requirements of U-1(j) in Section VIII, Division 1, may the volume of the tubes be deducted
from the total volume when the tube side is exempted from Code requirements?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Same as Question (1), but the tube side is not exempted from the Code?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC90-625
Question: May the die formed thin heat transfer plates of plate type heat exchangers, that are
mechanically assembled without welding, be produced by Manufacturers in accordance with the
requirements of UG-11(b) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Table UHA-23, Note (1)
File: BC90-627
Question: When designing a flange per Appendix 2, using SA-240 plate, may the value for the
allowable design stress for material of flange at design temperature S be the lower maximum allowable
stress value shown in Table UHA-23 in Section VIII, Division 1 due to the reference to Note (1)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-115(b)
File: BC90-464
Question(1): Is it the intention that the term "certified documents" in UG-115(b) in Section VIII,
Division 1 include fabrication drawings?
Reply (1) No. See also Interpretation VIII-1-89-183.
Question (2): May fabrication drawings be in the units selected by the Manufacturer provided that the
Authorized Inspector is satisfied that the Manufacturer's Data Report, per UG-115(b)(1) or (2), accurately
describes the vessel to be marked with the Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UCS-66(b)
File: BC89-162
Question (1): In addition to primary membrane tensile stresses, must peak, bending, or secondary
stresses be included when determining the stress in tension as defined by footnote 5 to UCS-66 in Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No, only primary membrane tensile stresses are considered.
Question (2): For Part UCS components of stationary vessels, where the ratio of design stress in tension
to allowable tensile stress is equal to or less than 0.4, may a 105° F credit be taken per Fig. UCS-66.1 for
minimum design metal temperatures of -50° F and warmer?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): For Part UCS components of stationary vessels, where the ratio of design stress in tension
to allowable tensile stress is equal to or less than 0.4, and for minimum design metal temperature colder
than -50° F, are impact tests required?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UCS-67(a)
File: BC89-226
Question(1): Does UCS-67(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 require production impact testing of welds
and heat-affected zones in accordance with UG-84 when:
(a) the minimum design metal temperature for the material is below the applicable curve of Fig.
UCS-66 for the governing thickness even after applying any adjustments per UCS-66(b) or
UCS-68(c)?
(b) the end-user requires impact testing of the material even though the conditions described in
Question (1)(a) do not apply?
Reply (1): (a) Yes. (b) Not required by Code rules.
Question (2): Is it the intent that UCS-67(a) requires production impact testing of welds and heat-
affected zones in accordance with UG-84 when the SA specification for the material used (e.g., SA-333
Gr. 6) requires impact testing but neither the conditions described in Questions (1)(a) nor (1)(b) above
apply?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC89-237
Question (1): A pod type partial jacket, as shown in Fig. 9-7 in Section VIII, Division 1, without stays
or penetrations, meets the limitations of 9-5(c)(1). May it be closed all around including the longitudinal
sides with a single fillet weld in accordance with Fig. 9-5 sketch (a)?
Reply (1): Yes, provided a proof test is performed in accordance with UG-101(p).
Question (2): For the jacket described in Question (1), may an unreinforced hole of any size and shape
be provided through the shell under the jacket, so that the shell pressure and jacket pressure are equalized
at all times?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix L-7
File: BC90-404
Question (1): A nozzle wall has a Category A joint with a joint efficiency of 0.85. The nozzle is not
through a Category A joint of the vessel shell. In determining the area of excess thickness in the vessel
wall available for reinforcement A1 in UG-37(a) in Section VIII, Division 1, is the value of E1 equal to
1.0?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If a two piece reinforcing pad is provided for the nozzle in Question (1) and no
radiographic examination is performed for the weld joining the two pieces, must A1 in Question (1) be
recalculated using E1 = 0.7?
Reply (2): No.

File: BC90-651
Question: A subcontractor of forming services cut A 825, Grade C plate material and transferred
only the heat number. A review of the MTR demonstrates that the chemical properties of the heat and the
mechanical properties of the heat and the mechanical properties of each test piece are in compliance with
the material specifications. Is this sufficient to demonstrate compliance with UG-10(a) in Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Use of SA-105 Material
File: BC90-656
Question: May the body flanges and hubs of carbon steel pressure vessels that will be built in
accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, with inside shell diameters larger than 24 in., be made from
SA-105 forgings?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-90(c)(1)(1)
File: BC90-649
Question (1): Vessels fabricated of SA-372 Type V Grade 1 Class B are forged by a material
manufacturer as seamless unibody vessels. All requirements of SA-372 are met. The forgings are based
on design drawings that show the MAWP and hydrostatic test pressure, supplied by the Stamp Holder.
May the material manufacturer perform the required hydrostatic test on these vessels and certify the test
pressure as part of the material test report?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Must the Code Symbol Stamp Holder take responsibility for performing the hydrostatic
test, and have it witnessed by the Inspectors as required in UG-90(c)(1)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC90-650
Question (1): When a vessel Manufacturer designs and fabricates a large vessel in two sections and
ships them to a field location for final assembly by another party, is the vessel Manufacturer the party
required to complete the U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report for the "Certificate of Shop Compliance"
portion?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Must the vessel Manufacturer apply the U Stamp to the vessel after completion of the
field assembly?
Reply (2): Yes. See U-2(i)(3).
Interpretation- VIII-1-89-247
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UW-26(d)
File: BC90-689
Question (1): May a Manufacturer, who holds a valid ASME Certificate of Authorization and Code
Symbol Stamp, contract a non-Code stamp shop to build vessels requiring the ASME Code Stamp when
the shop's welders are qualified under the Certificate Holder's WPS'S, and all provisions of UW-26 in
Section VIII, Division 1 are met, and be under the control of the Certificate Holder's quality control
manager?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is yes, can an employee of the non-Code shop be assigned as a field quality
control representative if the Certificate Holder's quality control manager takes full responsibility for the
vessels?
Reply (2) Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-l-89-247R

File: BC02-2474*
Question: May a manufacturer, who holds a valid ASME Certification of Authorization and Code
Symbol Stamp, contract a shop, which does not hold a valid ASME Certification of Authorization and
Code Symbol stamp, to fabricate vessels requiring the ASME Code Stamp when the non-Code shop’s
welders are qualified under the Certificate Holder’s WPS’s, and all provisions of UW-26(d) in Section
VIII, Division 1 are met, and are under the control of the Certificate Holder’s Quality Control manager?
Reply: No.
Note: This interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Volume 52 of the interpretations.
File: BC90-690
Question: May pressure vessels that satisfy the requirements of UG-20(f)(1), (3), (4), and (5) in
Section VIII, Division 1, but are pneumatically tested in accordance with Code Case 1518-3 or 2055 be
exempted from impact testing by UG-20(f)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Fig. 2-4
File: BC90-653
Question: For pressure vessels that are also operated under vacuum, can the internal fillet weld on
the flanges shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (3), (3a), (4), and (4a) in Section VIII, Division 1 be stitch
welded rather than continuously welded?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-725
Question: Would the provisions of UG-90(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 allow a production worker,
such as a welder, to verify the manufacturing operation of weld joint fit up and weld contour?
Reply: Yes, provided that the written Quality Control System accounts for such implementation,
is fully implemented at all times, and that the completed vessel meets Code requirements.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UW-51(b)
File: BC90-743
Question (1): Are the provisions of UW-51(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 satisfied when a radiograph,
taken after repair, meets all of the requirements of Article 2 in Section V including the minimum density
limitations, even when the density differs considerably from that of the initial radiograph for the same
weldment?
Reply (1): Yes, as long as all other requirements of UW-51 are met.
Question (2): Can a weld seam be accepted after such a procedure as described in Question (1) is
performed?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC90-686
Question: Is it the intent that the maximum allowable stress value for design in 22-3 in Section VIII,
Division 1 be determined using the minimum tensile strength specified in the material specification
(Section II) for the Type, Grade, and Class used?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-484
Question (1): May the minimum weld size per Fig. UW-19.1 in Section VIII, Division 1 be based on
the required thickness of the thinner stayed plate instead of the nominal thickness when an opening is
located in the stayed plate and the welded staybolt is outside the area of reinforcement?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May the end of the staybolt that protrudes into the stayed plate be beveled to reduce the
bevel needed on the stayed plate and still meet the requirements of UW-19(a)(1) and Fig. UW-19.1?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May backing material that is left in place be used to achieve full penetration welds of
welded staybolts as shown in Fig. UW-19.1 sketch (e)?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-127(a)(3)(b)
File: BC90-542
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-127(a)(3)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to

use a rupture disk in combination with a pressure relief valve when the disk's bursting pressure is 300 psig
and then the set pressure (pop action) of the valve is 400 psig?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-655
Question: Do the rules of UG-25(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 require the depth of a telltale hole to
be at least 80% of the minimum required thickness of a seamless shell?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Appendix 1, 1-5(e)
File: BC90-688
Question: The equation for Aes, Formula (4) in 1-5(e) in Section VIII, Division 1, uses tr in the
second half of the formula. Is tr the tr of the small end of the cone, based on the small diameter?
Reply: Yes, tr is the required thickness of the cone at the point being considered.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-101(m)(2)(c) and 175(a)(1)
File- BC90-772
Question: When using the formula noted in UG-101(m)(2)(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 for a burst
test on a dimpled panel per 17-1(a)(1) and (e), may a 0.80 efficiency be used as specified in 17-5(a)(1)
provided UW-19(c) and UG-47 have been met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Fig. 2-4 Sketch (3)
File: BC90-773
Question: May ANSI B16.5 slip on flanges, utilized as described in Interpretation VIII-77-17, be
attached as shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (3) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UCS-79(d)
File: BC90-746
Question: May a forming subcontractor take exception to one or both of items (1) and (2) of UCS-
79(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 if it is unknown at the time of forming whether or not they are
applicable?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UHT-18 and UHT-28
File: BC90-732
Question(1): A pressure vessel is to be fabricated from SA-508 Cl. 4 material, and will accommodate
both external and internal attachments (e.g., insulation clips, internal supports, instrumentation leads).
Weld build-up pads will be used, which meet all Code requirements. Are the proposed vessel attachments
exempt from the requirements of UHT-18 and UHT-28 in Section VIII, Division 1 regarding the specified
minimum strength requirements?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is capacitor discharge welding permitted in Section VIII, Division 1 for the attachment of
instrumentation leads to the vessel's inside diameter?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions I and 2 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), U-I(c)(5) and AG-121(e)
File: BC90-652
Question (1): Process equipment is enclosed by a Section VIII, Division 2 vessel. Section I and ANSI
piping is used to transport the working fluid to and from the process equipment across the vessel
boundary. A thermal sleeve type connection whose inside diameter is greater than 6 in. is used to attach
the piping to the Section VIII, Division 2 vessel. The connection consists of the vessel reinforcement
forging, the thermal sleeve (a length of pipe used to connect the reinforcement forging to the knuckle
forging), and the knuckle forging which connects the thermal sleeve to the penetrating process pipe, The
sleeve sees the vessel pressure which is in excess of 15 psi. The vessel pressure is not equal to the
pressure within the process pipe. May, under the provisions of AG-120(a)(1), the thermal sleeve and
knuckle forging be considered to be outside the geometric scope of the Division 2 vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Reply (1) apply to Section VIII, Division 1 geometric scope as referenced in U-
1(e)(1)(a)?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC89-109
Question(1): In a self-actuated pilot operated pressure relief valve, may the self-actuated pilot be
electronic?
Reply (1): No
Question (2): May a pilot operated pressure relief valve with self-actuated pilot conforming to UG-126
also be equipped by the valve manufacturer with a parallel electronic pilot to improve accuracy and
control of opening and closing pressures?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the electronic pilot does not interfere with the normal operation of the self-
actuated pilot.
File: BC89-129
Question: A pressure vessel is fabricated and hydrostatically tested per the requirements of Section
VIII, Division 1, and the Authorized Inspector verified Code compliance during the manufacturing and
testing process. Must the Authorized Inspector immediately sign the Manufacturer’s Data Report Form
and the Manufacturer apply the nameplate?
Reply: The Code does not address the time frame during which the Manufacturer's Data Report
Form must be signed. However, UG-90 makes it the responsibility of the Manufacturer to apply the
nameplate and assure the Manufacturer's Data Report Form is signed by the Authorized Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-81 and UW-33
File: BC89-234
Question(1): Are the requirements of UG-81(a) to be measured as the distance from the edge of a
template of the specified dish radius plus or minus the allowance specified?
Reply (1): UG-81(a) specifies the tolerances to which the head must be formed. The method of
checking the formed head is at the discretion of the Manufacturer.
Question (2): Are the requirements of UG-81(b) to be measured using templates of the specified dish
radius plus or minus the allowance specified?
Reply (2): UG-81(b) imposes additional requirements when formed heads are designed for external
pressure. UG-80(b)(2) describes the method to be used for checking the plus or minus deviation from true
circular form.
Question (3): Is there a limit below which the present requirement of UW-33 and Table UW-33 need
not be applied and for which a somewhat greater alignment tolerance can be applied?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): For metal thicknesses 3/16 in. and below, may butt weld edge offsets greater than 1/4 t
be tapered by use of weld metal build-up without the need for examination in accordance with UW-
42(b)(2)?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): UW-33(b) indicates that offsets within the limits of Table UW-33 must be tapered,
whereas UW-9(c) notes that only sections which differ in thickness by greater than 1/4 t or 1/8 in. need
the 3:10 (3:1 taper see errata page 633) taper. What is the distinction?
Reply (5): UW-33 refers to alignment tolerances only. UW-9(c) and UW-33 are design requirements
which specify taper transition requirements when welding sections of different thicknesses. Both
requirements must be met.
Errata
Volume 29
Interpretation
VIII-1-89-264 In the third line of Question (5), correct 3:10 taper to read 3:1 taper
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), Appendix 9. 9-5(c)(1)-(5)
File: BC89-239
Question: Are the jacket closure bars designed to the requirements of Appendix 9, 9-5(c)(1), (2),
(3), (4), and (5) adequate as stiffening rings, as stated in UG-29(f), when there is a pressure in the jacket?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-136(b)(2)
File: BC90-187
Question: Section VIII, Division 1 UG-136(b)(2) requires that springs for safety and safety relief
valves shall be corrosion resistant material or have a corrosion resistant coating. Does corrosion resistant
paint, appropriate for the service intended, meet the requirement for a "corrosion resistant coating" for
safety and safety relief valve springs?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UG-84(g)(2), UG-20(b), and
UCS-66(c)
File: BC89-253
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide rules on what atmospheric temperature (minimum,
mean) to use in establishing the minimum design metal temperature?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide any rules in locating an impact specimen notch
other than that given in UG-84(g)(2)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC90-225
Question: Is it permissible to design a vessel for operations below the minimum design metal
temperature (MDMT) stamped on the nameplate provided the reduction in MDMT for the coincident
design stress in tension results in a temperature that is no colder than that permitted by Fig. UCS-66.1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Table UHA-23, Dual Marking
File: BC90-256
Question(1): May dual stenciled 304/304L plate products with appropriate mill test reports be used as
either 304 or 304L material at design temperatures of 1000° F and lower?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May dual stenciled 304/304L plate product with appropriate mill test reports be used as
304 material at design temperatures greater than 1000° F [Note (8) of Table UHA-23 applies]?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC90-295
Question(1): Is autorefrigeration a consideration in determining the minimum metal temperature used in

design?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-20(b).
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 include requirements on how autorefrigeration is to be
considered, other than that given in UG-20(b)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(2)(a)
File: BC90-300
Question: Are the tensile tests in 17-7(a)(2)(a) to be performed in accordance with Fig. 17-6?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-792
Question: Are the symbols defined in UW-16(b) to be applied in the corroded condition?
File: BC90-770
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UCS-67(a) to use an E 7018 electrode, under
SFA 5.1, for SMAW without including impact tests in the WPQ, when the base metal (SA-516 Grade 70,
normalized) is exempted from impact testing by Fig. UCS-66?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Fig. UCS-66
Date Issued; January 31, 1991
File: BC90-861
Question: Do the impact exemption curves in Fig. UCS-66 apply to forgings?
Reply: Yes, Curve B of Fig. UCS-66 is applicable unless exempted by other Notes to the Figure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), U-2(g) and UG-29(b)
File: BC91-011
Question: When a stiffener ring extends completely around the outside circumference of a cylinder
and intersects a nozzle, may a connection between a nozzle and stiffener be made if the required moment
of inertia of the ring shell section is maintained through the nozzle per UG-29(b) and design and
construction details are submitted and accepted by the Authorized Inspector per U-2(g)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-36(b)(1)
File: BC91-014
Question: Do the opening size limits of UG-36(b)(1) apply to the finished opening size when the
finished and unfinished opening sizes are different?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-013
Question: May nonexpanded API 5L Grade X52 be used for Section VIII, Division 1 pressure
vessel construction when certified in accordance with UG-10?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-747
Question: A pod type partial jacket, as shown in Fig. 9-7, without stays or penetrations, meets the
limitations of 9-5(c)(1). May a reinforced opening be provided through the shell under the jacket so that
the shell pressure and jacket pressure are equalized at all times?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCS-66(a)
File: BC90-771
Question: Is it the intent of the Code that a fabricated tubesheet made out of SA-204 Grade B plate,
which is 8 in. thick, has a minimum design metal temperature of 120° F or warmer, and contains a butt
joint, be exempted from impact testing under the requirements of UCS-66(a)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-11(a)(1) and UG-93(a)(1)
File: BC90-774
Question(1): Do the thin heat transfer plates of a mechanically assembled plate type heat exchanger
constitute a pressure boundary?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is "yes," can these plates be considered "standard pressure parts" if they meet
all the requirements of UG-11(a)(1)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Hydrostatic Test of Completed
Vessel
File: BC90-787
Question(1): A vessel is to be fabricated for nonlethal service and is comprised of two shell courses
joined by a bolted flanged connection. May each shell course be hydrostatically tested separately and the
completed vessel, when attached, be Code Symbol stamped as a single vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are separate Code Symbol Stamps required for each shell course as described in
Question (1)?
Reply (2): Each shell course may be U-Part stamped, but the completed and bolted together halves
shall be hydrostatically tested as one unit before the U-Code Symbol Stamp may be applied.
File: BC90-791
Question: May a welded pipe fitting, manufactured in accordance with one of the referenced ANSI
Standards listed in UG-44, or of materials specifically listed in an ANSI product standard, meeting all
applicable welding and examination requirements of Division 1, be utilized as the shell of a pressure
vessel without the issuance of a Partial Data Report?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-11(a)
File: BC90-865
Question: Under the requirements of UW-11(a) is radiography mandatory for Category B and C
butt welds where the values of NPS and/or wall thickness exceed 10 and 1 1/8 in., respectively?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-863
Question: Is it permissible to manufacture a pressure vessel using P-No. 1 material, with a thickness
greater than 1 1/2 in., without performing postweld heat treatment per Table UCS-56 if postweld heat
treated groove faces buttered with ASME SFA 5.1 classified electrodes are used?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), UW-13(e)(4) and Fig. UW-13.2
Sketch (g)
File: BC91-048
Question: A noncircular pressure vessel is constructed with a corner joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.2
sketch (g). Do the requirements of the Code allow the beveling of the shell thickness such that the sum a1
+ a2 + groove weld = 2ts?
Reply: Yes,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1987 Addenda), U-2(h)
File: BC89-303, BC86-250B
Question: Under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, may a Certificate of Authorization be issued
with the scope restricted to design without manufacturing or manufacturing without design responsibility?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-319
Question: Under the provisions of UG-99(b), may the ratio (S test temperatures design temperature)
for the bolting material be used in calculating the required hydrostatic test pressure if it results in the
lowest ratio for the material of which the vessel is constructed for:
(1) bolted flange connections designed per Appendix 2?
(2) bolted flange connection which comply with an ANSI product standard or a Manufacturer's
standard as permitted in UG-11?
Reply:
(1) Yes.
(2) No; the limiting hydrostatic test pressure shall be established in accordance with the
applicable standard
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-40(a)(3)
File: BC90-437
Question (1): Do the rules of UW-40(a)(3) permit the local PWHT of longitudinal weld seams in shell
sections by means of heating elements placed longitudinally along the weld seams without heating the
total circumference of the shell course?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do the rules of UW-40(a)(3) permit the local PWHT of longitudinal weld seams in a
completed vessel by any method that isolates the heated area to the weld and a zone adjacent to the weld,
without heating the total circumference of the shell?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC90-693
Question: Does Note (4) of Table UCS-56 for P-No. 3 material apply to P-No. 3 Group No. 3?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-84(c)(4)(a) and (b)
File: BC90-342, BC90-442
Question: For Table UCS-23 materials, whose specified minimum tensile strength is 95,000 psi or
more and for Table UHA-23 materials, is it the intent that the requirements of UG-84(c)(4)(a) apply in
addition to the requirements of UG-84(c)(4)(b)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)
File: BC91-045
Question: Under the provisions of 17-7(a)(1), must each welding operator, using the same weld
procedure for spot welding a dimpled plate to a plain plate, perform a separate pressure proof test?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-046
Question: When radiographing a butt weld in a pipe joint containing a permanent backing ring
(strip), does the butt welded joint in the backing ring (strip) have to be of the same radiographic quality as
the
weld in the pipe joint, in accordance with the requirements of UW-51?
Reply: Yes (see Section V, Article 2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Table UCS-56, Note (2)(a) for P-
Nos. 1 and 10C Material
File: BC91-049
Question: In Table UCS-56, Note (2)(a) for P-Nos. 1 and 10C materials, does the reference to
"material over 1 1/2 in. nominal thickness" refer to:
(a) base metal only;
(b) to the welded joint thickness as defined in UW-40(f).
Reply:
(a) No.
(b) Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), UG-102(c)
File: BC91-056
Question: Is it necessary under the requirements of UG-102(c) to verify pressure gauge calibration
on a daily basis if one's Q.C. Manual outlines a gauge calibration program which requires annual
calibration or sooner if the gauge is suspected of being out of calibration?
Reply: The method of verification of calibration of a gauge as required by UG-102(c) shall be

given in the QA/QC program as described in 10-12.
File: BC91-083
Question: For a pressure vessel designed for low temperature service (-40° F) where a flat head
with thickness of 0.9843 in. is attached to a shell of thickness 0.2520 in., using the detail in Fig. UW-13.2,
sketch (d), is the shell thickness the governing thickness per UCS-66(a)(1)(b)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-051
Question: If two openings of identical size are directly across from one another, can 2% of each
opening, be added together, and this amount then added to the 1% referred to in UG-80(a)(1) and still
meet the requirements of UG-80(a)(2)?
Reply: No.
File: BC91-168
Question: If two pieces of stainless steel are welded together using resistance spot welding, and a
reduction in thickness due to the welding process is observed, are the requirements of UW-35(b)(1) and
(2) applicable for determining the remaining metal thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Appendix 17, 17-3 and Table 17-
3
File: BC91-047
Question: May SA-240 Type 317L stainless steel material be used in the construction of a dimpled
assembly, as shown in Fig. 17-2, using tungsten-arc spot and seam welding if all the other requirements in
Appendix 17 are met?
Reply: No.
File: BC91-050
Question: Are the requirements of UW-11(d) applicable to austenitic stainless steel, P-No. 8,
materials?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Simulated PWHT on Test
Coupons of Alloy Steel Forgings
File: BC91-194
Question: Must simulated PWHT be performed on test coupons of alloy steel forgings when the
forgings have been tempered at a temperature equal to or higher than the intended temperature for
PWHT?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Appendix F
File: BC91-209
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the application of abrasion resistant flame spray
coatings in high wear areas on cast iron, or any other materials, used in pressure vessel manufacturing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (h)
File: BC90-433
Question: A nozzle neck is welded to a blind flange with a detail similar to Fig. UW-13.2 sketch
(h). This neck thickness is more than needed for design. Could the weld be sized so that dimension a is
three times the required nozzle thickness at the point of attachment to the cover?
Reply: No. See definition of ts in UW-13(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG-136(c)(4)(d)
Date Issued:. May 30, 1991
File: BC90-864A
Question: Under the requirements of UG-136(c)(4)(d), may an assembler, who has been granted
permission by ASME to use an ASME Code Symbol Stamp, apply the Code Symbol Stamp to a pressure
relief valve without the instructions of the manufacturer of the valve?
Reply: No.
File: BC91-012
Question: If a single relief device is employed to protect a pressure vessel from overpressure due to
process upset as well as external fire or other sources of external heat, can this relief device be sized for
fire exposure on the basis of an allowed vessel overpressure of 21%?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-134(b) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCI-78
File: BC91-103
Question: May surface imperfections which do not permit leakage, and which are within the
dimensions allowed to be repaired by a threaded plug, be left in place or repaired by metal spraying if the
depth does not exceed 20% of thickness of the section, and the applicable requirements of UCI-78(a)(6)
to (10) are fulfilled?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), U-1(j)
File: BC91-107
Question: May a part meeting the requirements of U-1(j) be furnished as a part bearing a UM Part
Stamp?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Use of Shot Peening
Methods
File: BC91-116
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 to use
controlled shot peening, or other similar methods, during the fabrication of pressure vessels?
Reply: The Code neither requires nor prohibits the application of shot peening methods to
enhance surface properties.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as VIII-2-89-25
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UCS-66(a)(1)(b)
File: BC90-726
Question: Is the use of impact tested material mandated, as required under UCS-66(a)(1)(b), when
two materials are welded together to form a corner joint and the thickness of the thicker of the two
materials exceeds 4 in. while the thickness of the thinner of the two materials is equal to or less than 4 in.?
Reply: Yes (No see errata on page 521)

Errata
Volume 29
VIII-1-89-308 In Reply, correct Yes to read No
File: BC87-382
Question: For special bolted, mechanical, or quick-opening closure assemblies intended as a part of
a pressure vessel to be constructed according to Section VIII, Division 1, may the maximum allowable
working pressure be established by a proof test according to UG-101(m) except that the formula be
revised as follows:
P = 1/2BL SE/Sa or 1/2BL SE/Sm

where
(1) the first term replaces the term B15 in UG-101(m); and
(2) BL = pressure at which test was stopped before a leak occurred or the pressure at which the
first indication of a leak occurred?
Reply: No.
File: BC89-376
Question(1): May a tube-to-tubesheet weld of a double grooved, double rolled, and seal welded new
tube be performed on a new tube-side cladded tubesheet (where credit is not taken for clad material) after
performing a hydrostatic test under UG-99 without the need for a second hydrotest?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May a tube-to-tubesheet weld of a double grooved, double rolled, and seal welded new
tube be performed on a single metal new tubesheet after performing a hydrostatic test without the need for
a second hydrotest?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-5(b)(2)
File: BC90-237
Austin: Do the words "... materials specification not permitted in this Division,.....” in UW-5(b)(2)
include material specifications established by a Manufacturer?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda UG-125
File: BC90-343
Question: Do the requirements under UG-125 require that every pressure vessel have a relief device
to protect it from overpressure, either mounted directly on the vessel, or in the piping system without
intervening stop valves except as permitted in UG-135(e)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-125
File: BC90-343*
Question: Do the requirements under UG-125 of Section VIII, Division 1 require that every
pressure vessel have a relief device to protect it from overpressure, either mounted directly on the vessel
or in the piping system without intervening stop valves except as permitted in UG-135(e)?
Reply: Yes; see footnote 39 of UG-125.
File: BC90-470
Question(1): May the metal for a single nozzle reinforcement be located asymmetrically about the
nozzle center line, within the stated boundaries for the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (1): Yes, provided at least half the required reinforcement be on each side of the center line of
the opening.
Question (2): May the shell nozzle reinforcement area include bolted flange metal from a weld neck
flange welded to the shell and located within the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May the shell nozzle reinforcement area include metal from the straight flange portion of
a dished shell cover welded to the shell and within the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1999 Edition), UCS-85(b) and (e)
File: BC90-483
Question(1): Is heat treatment of test specimens under UCS-85(b) required for material listed in P-Nos.
3, 4, and 5 of QW-422 when:
(a) the heat treatment during fabrication will be limited to PWHT at a temperature below the
lower transformation temperature of the materials?
(b) the heat treatment during fabrication will be limited to normalizing and tempering per the
material specification followed by PWHT at a temperature below the lower transformation temperature of
the material?
Reply (1):
(a) Yes,
(b) Yes.
Question (2): May a material manufacturer perform the simulated heat treatment of test specimens
required by UCS-85(b)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-134(d)(1)
File: BC90-631
Question: With reference to UG-134(d)(1), is the 3% set pressure tolerance for pressures above 70
psi "plus or minus" tolerance?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC90-679
Question: May a vessel be fabricated using material for the shell conforming to UHT requirements
(e.g., SA-517), and material for the head conforming to UCS requirements (e.g., SA-445), provided that
all applicable requirements in Section IX for welding dissimilar metals are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UW-40(a)(5)
File: BC90-682
Question: Do the requirements of UW-40(a)(5) apply if a nozzle or attachment to an ellipsoidal

head is locally heated in a concentric he,-it band that extends six times the head thickness beyond the
reinforcing pad or weld, and the heated area does not contact any tangent or other attachment weld?
Reply: No. See U-2(g).
File: BC90-685
Question: Are the minimum requirements for stamping a completed vessel RT-1 as follows: that all
pressure-retaining butt welds other than Category B and C butt welds associated with nozzles and
communicating chambers that neither exceed NPS 10 nor 1 1/8 in. wall thickness [except as required by
UHT-57(a)] shall have been examined radiographically for their full length in the manner prescribed in
UW-51?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition, 1988 Addenda), UHA-52(b)
File: BC91-055
Question: Do the requirements of UHA-52(b) only apply to the material stated in UHA-52(a)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-265
Question: Is it the intent of UG-11(c)(2) to prohibit the use of T bolt shell closures (lugs welded to
the closure) that comply with UG-11(c)(2) in the construction of pressure vessels in accordance with this
Division?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-441
Question (1): UG-84(e)(3) refers to the volume limitations of U-1(k). Is it the intent of the Code
that this reference be made to U-1(j) instead of U-1(k)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are all the limitations of U-1(j) to be considered when applying the provisions of UG-
84(e)(3) for "small vessels"?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition); UF-32(b) and UF-37
File: BC90-235
Question: Is it the intent that the requirements for radiography, magnetic particle and liquid
penetrant examination, and postweld heat treatment in UF-32(b) and UF-37 of Section VIII, Division 1
apply to capacitor discharge thermocouple attachments on forgings manufactured in accordance with a
specification given in Section II after quenching and before tempering? The thermocouple attachment
welds would be completely removed by grinding prior to completion of vessel or vessel part.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1, Sketch (g)
File: BC90-684
Question: A vertical vessel with a conical bottom head is supported on a skirt. Is it the intent of the
Code that the conical head may be attached to the shell using the detail shown in Fig. UW-13.1, sketch
(g), but with the attachment weld on the other side of the cone?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-11
File: BC91-230
Question: Is it permissible to use investment cast wing nuts of A 351, CF 10S material, with a 304
stainless steel threaded bolt, and meet the requirements of UCS-11 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-93(d)(3)
File: BC91-283
Question: Does a double fillet lap joint such as shown in Fig. 2-4, sketch (3a), of Section VIII,
Division 1 between a nozzle and a slip-on flange required to meet the provisions of UG-93(d)(3);
specifically, does the exposed surface of the flange not covered by the fillet weld need to be examined by
magnetic particle or liquid penetrant test?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-37(a)
File: BC91-292
Question: A nozzle in a cylindrical shell is being calculated for reinforcement. The nozzle is made
from welded pipe, SA-312 TP316. In determining the value for trn, the pipe is assumed to be seamless.
Can the same assumption be made for the nozzle material when calculating the value of Sn for nozzle
reinforcement per paragraph UG-37?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-11(c)
File: BC91-270
Question: Is it the intent of UG-11(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 that the reference to heads in the
subtitle be applicable to only formed or flat heads containing a Category A butt weld (i.e., segmented or
two piece heads)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Material Certificate of
Authorization
File: BC91-301
Question: Does a material manufacturer, who supplies either forgings, plates, tubes, bolts, or nuts
require a material certificate of authorization to produce materials being used by a fabricator who holds a
valid U or U2 Certificate of Authorization?
Reply: No.
Note: This Interpretation also appears in Section VIII, Division 2 as VIII-2-92-01
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-116(a)(6)
File: BC91-310
Question: Is it acceptable under the requirements of UG-116(a)(6) in Section VIII, Division 1 to

stamp on the nameplate the "month" the vessel was fabricated as an addition to the mandatory stamping
of the "year built"?
Reply: The stamping of the "month" is not part of the required markings for the nameplate;
however, it may be permissible with the concurrence of the Authorized Inspector.

File: BC91-386
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-116 in Section VIII, Division 1 to mark a
vessel with the Manufacturer's identifying trademark in lieu of the name of the Manufacturer?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-92-09R (Void, see VIII-1-92-09R-2)

File: BC91-386*
Reply: Yes, provided the name on the nameplate is that as shown on the Certificate of
Authorization.
Interpretation: VIII-1-92-09R-2
File: BC91-386**
Reply: Yes, provided the identification on the nameplate is that as listed on the reverse side of
the ASME Application for Accreditation.
File: BC91-387
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-119(c), in Section VIII, Division 1 to have
the stamping of the Manufacturer's serial number done with a computer driven single pin stamper, when
the characters created are legible, and the provisions of UG-119(c)(2) are met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-84(b)(2) and Table UG-84.4
File: BC91-413
Question(1): Is it permissible to use a Welding Procedure qualified in accordance with Section IX,
including all supplementary requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, in the construction of a vessel using
Part UCS material having a Specified Minimum Yield Strength equal to or less than 40 ksi when the
specified MDMT is -60°F but the procedure qualification test plates were impact tested at -50°F?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For a vessel as described in Question (1), may material impact tested at -50° F (e.g., SA-
516 70N, SA-350 LF2) be used?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): For a vessel as described in Question (1), may the vessel (production) test plates be
impact tested at -50° F?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): For any of the conditions described above, is it required to include "Table UG-84.4" in
the Remarks section of the Manufacturer's Data Report Form?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 19, 19-3
File: BC91-432
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of 19-3 of Appendix 19 in Section VIII, Division
1 to use structural grade carbon steel, SA-36 and SA-283 (Grades A, B, C, and D), for pressure parts of
gas fired jacketed steam kettles when these parts are not in contact with products of combustion?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-119(e) and UG-119(f)
File: BC91-210
Question(1): May a nameplate, which is located within 30 in. of the vessel, be attached to a bracket
which is welded to a structure, such as a skirt support, which is welded directly to the vessel?
Reply (1): Yes, provided all the requirements of UG-119(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 are met.
Question (2): Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-119(f) to include data on an additional
nameplate, such as material and thickness, and mark it as "Duplicate"?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Requirements for Stamping and
Partial Data Report Forms for Assemblies Made to SA-649 Material
File: BC91-220
Question(1): A material manufacturer produces both roll shell and roll/trunnion assemblies to SA-649.
These parts are shipped to a corrugated paper machinery manufacturer for any required assembly, final
machining and hydrotest, before being Code Symbol stamped. In the case of roll shells or incomplete
assemblies made to SA-649, are Partial Data Reports required in addition to the SA-649 marking and
certification provisions, which are described in SA-788?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When making an incomplete roll assembly to SA-649, is it permissible for the material
manufacturer to stamp the roll with the appropriate U or UM stamp?
Reply (2): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); U-1(c)
File: BC91-232
Question: A vessel which by the provisions of U-1(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 is exempted is
nevertheless fabricated to the Code and Code Symbol stamped. Must a pressure relief device, as outlined
by the requirements in UG-125 through UG-136 of the Code, be installed?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); U-1(c)
File: BC91-232*
Question: A vessel which by the provisions of U-1(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 is exempted is
nevertheless fabricated to the Code and Code Symbol stamped. Must a pressure relief device, as outlined
by the requirements in UG-125 through UG-136 of the Code, be installed?
Reply: Yes, see footnote 39 of UG-125.

File: BC91-255
Question: According to the provisions of UG-15, may solution-annealed SA-351 Grade CF10S
MnN cast wingnuts conforming to the chemical and mechanical properties of SA-193 Grade B8S, be used
under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 provided that all other applicable requirements of UG-15 are
also met?
Reply: No, see UCS-11(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-40(c)(2)
File: BC91-268
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-40(c)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1, is the
maximum area available for reinforcement set by the height determined by adding te, as defined in Fig.
UG-40, plus 2 1/2tn?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-399
Question: Does UG-10(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, allow for recertification by independent
organizations other than the AIA?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1, Sketch (k)
File: BC91-171
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 permit an extension of hemispherical head material from
the tangent line of sufficient length to accomplish the offset and the 1 1/2t in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (k)
when the required thickness of the cylindrical shell projects to the tangent line of the head?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-66 and Fig. UCS-66
File: BC88-240
Question (1): What is the governing thickness of a casting if it is welded to a plate?
Reply (1): See UCS-66(a)(2).
Question (2): When a comer weld detail per Fig. UW-13.2 is used to weld a seamless flat plate with
thickness greater than 4 in. to a shell with thickness less than 4 in., is the governing thickness the
thickness of the shell ts?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-66 and Fig. UCS-66
File: BC89-037
Question (1): For parts covered by UG-11 for use in the construction of pressure vessels under Section
VIII, Division 1, do the rules of UCS-66 override the rules of UG-11(a)(1) and (b)?
Reply (1): Yes. See Note (b)(4), Fig. UCS-66
Question (2): May nonwelded parts, conforming with UG-11(a)(1) made from SA-216 Grade WCB
steel castings, be used for minimum metal temperatures not colder than -20° F without impact testing?
Reply (2): No, unless permitted by UCS-66 and Fig. UCS-66, Note(b)(4), or UG-20(f).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-90(b)(3) and UG-90(b)(6)
File: BC91-267
Question (1): Are the Manufacturer's responsibilities under UG-90(b)(3) and UG-90(b)(6) in Section
VIII, Division 1 satisfied by the review and acceptance of the certificates of compliance, or material test
report, once a material supplier has demonstrated through statistical process control that the material is
identified and that all physical characteristics are as required and specified?
Reply (1): The specific details of how the referenced Code rules are satisfied are to be covered in the
Manufacturer's Quality Control System.
Question (2): May a Manufacturer examine only the top plate or sheet on a skid or load, if the material
supplier certifies that the entire lot meets all the identification and physical characteristic requirements,
and that such lot is free of defects?
Question (3): May a Manufacturer satisfy the provisions of UG-90(b)(3) and UG-90(b)(6) based on the
review and acceptance of certificates of compliance only?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 9, 9-5(c)(4) and
9-5(c)(5)
File: BC91-433
Question: Is it required in using the formulas of Appendix 9, 9-5(c)(4) and 9-5(c)(5) in Section
VIII, Division 1 to substitute 1.5S for S?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-2(a)(1)(b), UW-11(a), and
Form U-1A
File: BC91-455
Question(1): In a lethal service application a seamless 2:1 ellipsoidal head is welded by a Category B
weld to a forged ring to form a quick-opening closure. The Category B joint is Type No.(1), and the full
radiography requirements of UW-11(a)(1) are thereby met for the vessel part being manufactured. Is it
required to also meet the spot radiographic provisions of UW-11(a)(5)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If "Full" is noted in Section 9 of Form U-2A, must it also be noted in Section 14
(Remarks) that the weld meets the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it required to note the crown radius and knuckle radius in addition to the elliptical ratio
in Section I0 of Form U-2A for the head used in Question (1)?
Reply (3): No.

File: BC91-474
Question: In calculating the values for tr and trn .in UG-37(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 when
ERW pipe is being used, is it permissible to use the allowable stress values for seamless pipe from the
Section VIII Tables?
Reply: No.
File: BC91-474*
Question: In calculating the values for tr and trn . in reinforcing calculations of UG-37(a) of Section
VIII, Division 1 when ERW pipe is being used, is it permissible to use the allowable stress values for
seamless pipe from the Section VIII Tables?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-28(b)
File: BC91-229
Question (1): In complying with the requirements of UW-28(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, would the
tubesheets of a shell and tube heat exchanger be considered pressure parts?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would the tubes of a shell and tube heat exchanger be considered pressure parts?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the Replies to Questions (1) and (2) are "Yes" and the tube-to-tubesheet joint is to be
welded, must the welding procedure to be used be qualified in accordance with Section IX as per
paragraph UW-28(b)?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-38, UW-51(b), and UW-
52(d)(2)(c)
File: BC91-516
Question: A welded joint in a vessel is radiographed and found not to be acceptable by the
requirements of UW-51, or UW-52 of Section VIII, Division 1. Do the provisions of UW-38, UW-51(b),
or UW-52(d)(2)(c) limit the number of weld repairs and subsequent examinations needed when the weld
continues to show unacceptable indications?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), Fig. UW-16.1, Sketch (v)
File: BC91-530
Question: Is the diameter limitation of NPS 6 given in UW-16(e) of Section VIII, Division 1
applicable to Interpretation VIII-1-86-61?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Forms U-1A and U-3
File: BC91-466
Question: For the conditions outlined in Interpretation VIII-1-86-218, is it required to specifically

record the joint efficiency factor of E = 0.85 in Forms U-IA and U-3 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-3(a)(1)
File: BC91-468
Question (1): A vessel is constructed using a 48 in. torispherical head with a 1 in. centering or "spin"
hole in the center of the head from the head manufacturer. The "spin" hole is plugged using either weld
metal or a metal plug, and the plug is butt welded. Does this joint constitute a Category A weld per UW-
3(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is "Yes," would this weld need to meet the joint efficiency
criteria in Table UW-12?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC91-468*
Question (1): A vessel is constructed using a 48 in. torispherical head with a 1 in. centering or "spin"
hole in the center of the head from the head Manufacturer. The "spin" hole is plugged using either:
(a) weld metal, or
(b) a metal plug which is butt welded in place.
Do either of these joints constitute a Category A weld per UW-3(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1):
(a) No, the Code does not categorize such a weld. The welding of this "spin" hole would
constitute a repair under the requirements of UG-78 in Section VIII, Division 1.
(b)Yes.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1)(a) or Question (1)(b) is yes, would this weld need to meet the
joint efficiency criteria in Table UW-12?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-32, UG-81(a), and UG-27(c)
File: BC91-517
Question: A seamless hemispherical head, concave to pressure, will be attached to a cylindrical

shell with a joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (d),(th (ts). The head has an out-of-roundness that
creates a flat section around the inside perimeter of the head. The out-of-roundness meets the criteria of
UG-81(a). May this flat section be considered a seamless cylindrical shell section for determining
thickness under the requirements of UG-27(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-11(a)(5)(b), UW-12(d), and
UW-52
File: BC91-518
Question (1): A vessel is constructed of a seamless pipe for the shell and a 2:1 elliptical head on each
end, each attached by a full penetration Type No. 1 Category B joint. The total weld length is 50 ft or less.
Must both Category B joints be spot radiographed, as a minimum under the provisions of UW-
11(a)(5)(b), to claim the joint efficiency factor of E = 1 for both heads?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the vessel in Question (1) was fabricated with a welded shell, would each Category B
joint be required to be radiographed?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): If the spot selected per UW-11(a)(5)(b) fails and the tracers required by UW-52(d)(2) on
the examined joint also fail, must the entire weld increment represented by the spot be removed or fully
radiographed as permitted by UW-52(d)(2)(b)?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC90-727
Question: Does UG-81(a) require that the knuckle radius of formed heads be not less than the
minimum specified in UG-32, and also stay within the permissible outside deviation 1 1/4% of the
nominal inside diameter of the vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-007
Question: A weld is radiographed in accordance with UW-51 and Article 2 of Section V. The
radiograph is evaluated by the Manufacturer and determined to be acceptable. The Inspector verifies that
the radiography has been performed and is acceptable [(UG-90(c)(1)(i)]. The seam is radiographed again
using another technique permitted by Section V, Article 2. If the second radiograph reveals unacceptable
imperfections, must they be replaced and re-examined?
Reply: No. There are small variations in sensitivity among the permitted radiography techniques.
However, within the range of tolerable differences experience has shown them to be practically
equivalent.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UHA-51(b)(5)(c)
File: BC91-100
Question (1): Is flux-cored arc welding a permissible welding process under the requirements of UHA-
51(b)(5)(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the reference in Section VIII, Division 1 to UHT-6(a)(3) and UHT-6(a)(4) in UG-
84(c)(4)(b) only applicable to materials that have had their tensile properties enhanced by heat treatment?
Reply (2): No, the reference is only to obtain the acceptance criteria for lateral expansion.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); Appendix 12, 12-3(b)
File: BC91-115
Question: Is an imperfection evaluated in accordance with the acceptance criteria of Appendix 12-
3(b), Section VIII, Division 1 rejectable only if the imperfection exceeds both the reference amplitude
level and relevant length in Appendix 12-3(b)(1)-(3)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-6(b), and Appendix 2
File: BC91-600
Question: Is it permissible to fabricate a flange per Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 sketch (7), by welding a 1
in. plate conforming to SA-36 to a 3/8 in. thick nozzle neck conforming to SA-106? The requirements of
UCS-6(b)(1) through UCS-6(b)(3) have been met.
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 17, 17-1(a)(1), (b)(4),
(b)(5), and (e)
File: BC91-559
Question(1): Is it permissible under the requirements of 17-1(a)(1), (b)(4), (b)(5), and (e) in Section
VIII, Division 1 to weld a predimpled and embossed jacket to a shell using GTAW with the addition of
filler metal?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the Reply (1) is no, then do the provisions of UW-19(c) and Section IX for fillet weld
procedures govern?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-85(b)
File: BC91-565
Question: A pressure vessel part, e.g., head, is subjected to heating between the lower
transformation temperature and normalizing temperature during its hot forming process, then followed by
a normalizing heat treatment above the lower transformation temperature upon completion of forming. Is
it required under the provisions of UCS-85(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to have a simulation test
specimen for both hot forming and normalizing heat treatment?
Reply: No, a test specimen would not be required for hot forming.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-11(a) and UG-116(e)(1)
File: BC92-036
Question (1): A welded cylindrical shell [Category A, Type No. (1) joint] is welded to a seamless
hemispherical head [Category A, Type No. (1) joint] at one end and a seamless ellipsoidal head [Category
B, Type No. (1) joint] at the other end. The vessel contains a nozzle that is butt welded [Category D, Type
No. (1) joint) to the shell. May this vessel be marked RT-1 if only the Category A and D butt welds are
radiographically examined their full length per UW-11(a) and UW-51?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May this vessel be marked RT-1 if all Category A, B, and D butt welded joints are
radiographically examined their full length per UW-11(a) and UW-51?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If Reply (2) is yes, may the hemispherical and ellipsoidal heads in the example above use
an E = 1.00 in Code calculations?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-66(a)(3)
File: BC91-044
Question: Do the requirements of UCS-66(a)(3), in the 1990 Addenda of Section VIII, Division 1,
for attachments that are welded to pressure retaining components, override the rules of U-1(e)(2),
UG-4(b), and UW-5(b)?
Reply: ' Yes, if the attachment is essential to the structural integrity of the vessel.
File: BC91-089
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 permit the inclusion as available reinforcement area of the
cross sectional area of material which lies within the limits of reinforcement per UG-40, but is not
attached to the vessel shell?
Reply: No; see UW-16(c)(2) and UW-16(d).
File: BC91-560
Question: Do the requirements of UG-127 in Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the fabrication of a
rupture disk and a rupture disk holder by different manufacturers, and the interchangeability of such
components?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Setting of Allowable Stresses,
UG-23, and Appendix P
File: BC91-564
Question (1): Is it permissible to use higher allowable stress values for materials than those specified in
the Tables of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No, see UG-23.
Question (2): Is it permissible to establish maximum allowable stresses using actual tensile and yield
values of a material and with Appendix P of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-9(c)
File: BC91-567
Question: Two cylinders of different thicknesses are welded together to form part of a vessel shell.
The extra thickness in the transition zone is not required to resist internal pressure, provide shell opening
reinforcement, or provide strength. Since the transition is located entirely within the extra thickness, does
the requirement for a 3:1 taper in UW-9(c) apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UCS-79(d)
File: BC91-627
Question: Is the formula for single curvature in UCS-79(d) applicable for the cylindrical part of a
formed head calculated under Appendix 1, 1-4?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 22, 22-3(d)(2)
File: BC91-628
Question: Do the provisions of 22-3(d)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 require that the maximum
central openings of integral heads be 50% of the diameter of the vessel or NPS 3, whichever is less?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC92-005
Question: Do the requirements of UG-125 in Section VIII, Division 1 provide for any specific time
frame in which upset conditions can occur to satisfy the provisions for safety relief?.
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-93
File: BC90-004
Question: Are material test reports as required by UG-93 of Section VIII, Division 1 required to be
signed by the Material Manufacturer?
Reply: No.
File: BC90-788
Question: Is a long weld neck flange supplied in an overlayed condition exempt from the
requirements of UG-116(h) and UG-120(c) if all the requirements of UG-11(c) are met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-84(h)(3)(b)
File: BC88-434 (BC89-465 and BC89-467)
Question: Does the phrase "Same heat treated condition" in UG-84(h)(3)(b) of Section VIII,
Division 1 mean that the following would be considered different heat treated conditions?
as rolled
annealed
normalized
normalized and tempered
quenched and tempered
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); U-1(e)
File: BC90-299 (BC90-264)
Question: Are pressure retaining metallic covers, including quick opening closures, within the
Scope of the Code, U-1(e), when furnished as part of a completed vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-384
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-118 in Section VIII, Division 1 for a
Manufacturer to utilize laser stamping or marking on fabricated pressure vessels?
Reply: No.
File: BC91-402
Question: May hinged heads fabricated to a parts Manufacturer's standard and complying with the
requirements of UG-11(c)(1) and (2) in Section VIII, Division 1 be used for vessel or communicating
chamber heads without Partial Data Reports?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 1, 1-5(b) and 1-8(a)
File: BC91-453
Question: In 1-5(b) and 1-8(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, has the joint efficiency E, in the
nomenclature been included unnecessarily?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-5(b)(2)
File: BC91-475
Question: Is it permissible to use the provisions of Appendix C, C-100.2 (Section IX) to satisfy the
requirements of UW-5(b)(2) for proof of weldable quality for nonpressure parts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Appendix 2, 2-4(a)(3) and 2-7(b)
File: BC92-053
Question: When loose type flanges without hubs are designed under 2-7(b) of Section VIII,
Division 1, are they also required to meet the provisions of 2-4(a)(3)?
Reply: No.
File: BC92-057
Question: Are any two imperfections, having indications exceeding the reference level amplitude,
acceptable if individual lengths do not exceed requirements under 12-3(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 and
separation can be established?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda), UCS-79(e)
File: BC91-289
Question: Is it the intent of UCS-79(e) that the parts manufacturer certify whether or not
postforming heat treatment was performed?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC92-077
Question: Is it permissible to use ANSI B16.5 flanges in accordance with UG-44 of Section VIII,
Division 1, when used with spiral wound gaskets or any other gasket without any calculation per
Appendix 2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Part UCI
File: BC92-098
Question: Under the requirements of Part UCI in Section VIII, Division 1, may SA-278 Cl. 45
material, produced as-cast without any stress relieving, be used to produce dryer rolls?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketches
(3) and (4)
File: BC92-099
Question: Are loose types flanges of the types shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches (3) and (4) of Section
VIII, Division 1 required to have two fillet welds?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UCS-66(c)
Date issued: April 20, 1992
File: BC92-075
Question: Are ANSI B16.5 steel flanges made of SA-105 material considered to be "ferritic" as they
would apply under the requirements of UCS-66(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC92-102
Question: Do the requirements of UG-20(f)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 specify a duration of time
at which ambient temperature can be below -20° F and still be classified as 'seasonal'?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-99 and UG-100
File: BC92-124
Question: A large vertical vessel is provided with circumferential stiffening rings. Due to
transportation constraints the stiffening rings cannot be welded to the vessel until it arrives at the
installation site. Would the requirements of UG-99 and UG-100 of Section VIII, Division 1 permit the
application of a hydrostatic or pneumatic test on the vessel prior to the installation of the stiffening rings?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UCS-56(d)(2)
File: BC92-054
Question: Is the 400° F/hr heating rate given in UCS-56(d)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 a
maximum rate, where local variations would be tolerated within the hour?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-135(b)
File: BC92-055
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-135(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to

install a spectacle blind (figure 8) with a full area opening at the inlet of the PSV, between the vessel and
its pressure relieving devices, provided it is identified and operated as a stop valve (see Appendix M-5)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC92-101
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-29(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to have a
gap in a stiffening ring, without a bridge of equal or greater moment of inertia, as long as the gap is equal
to or less than that shown in Fig. UG-29.2?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); UG-37(a) and Fig. UG-37.1
File: BC91-102
Question: With reference to interpretation VIII-1-89-72: if a shell is made up of a seamless pipe,

then does t = nominal thickness less mill tolerance, when calculating reinforcement requirements per Fig.
UG-37.1 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, see UG-16(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); UG-37(a) and Fig. UG-37.1
File: BC91-102*
Question: With reference to Interpretation VIII-1-89-72, if a shell is made from seamless pipe does
t = nominal thickness less mill tolerance apply when calculating nozzle reinforcement requirements per
Fig. UG-37.1 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes; see UG-16(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-43(d)
File: BC91-308
Question: May the drilled and tapped holes of a studded connection that is attached to a vessel shell
or head with a full penetration weld penetrate to within 1/4t (where t is defined in UW-16),
exclusive of corrosion allowance?
Reply: Yes; see also Interpretation VIII-1-86-102.
File: BC91-177
Question: The maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) for a vessel is determined in
accordance with UG-98 of Section VIII, Division 1. May the vessel be stamped with this MAWP even
though it exceeds the design pressure initially specified in accordance with UG-21?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-37(a) and UW-16(b)
File: BC91-303
Question: Does the nomenclature for t and tn in UG-37(a) and UW-16(b), and tn in Appendix 2 of
Section VIII, Division 1 represent the same dimension as defined in Appendix 3 for nominal thickness?
Reply: Yes, except when a corrosion allowance is specified, then all dimensional symbols used
in design formulas are in the corroded condition.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UW-50 and UW-50(b)
File: BC91-401
Question: For the required examination provisions given in UW-50 of Section VIII, Division 1,
must the examination be performed on both the inside and outside of the vessel where accessible?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC91-412
Question (1): Is it prohibited under the requirements of UG-4(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 for a
Manufacturer to order materials, subjected to stress due to pressure, to an ASTM specification with year
date if the current and corresponding ASME specification is identical with the ASTM specification?
Reply (1): No. See the Foreword.
Question (2): Under the condition stated in Question (1), is it permissible to record on the
Manufacturer's Data Report Form the corresponding ASME designation, i.e., SA, SB?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); UG-116(e), (f), and (j)
File: BC91-467
Question(1): In the case of a multichambered pressure vessel, specifically a shell and tube heat
exchanger designed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, is it permissible to identify the
radiographic and heat treatment requirements for each chamber separately with markings in a
conspicuous place on the nameplate of the completed vessel or applied to each independent pressure
chamber, without the appropriate radiography and heat treatment markings directly under the Code
Symbol?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In the case of a multichambered pressure vessel, specifically, a shell and tube heat
exchanger designed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, is it permissible to identify the
radiographic and heat treatment requirements for each chamber separately with markings in a
conspicuous place on the nameplate of the completed vessel or applied to each independent pressure
chamber, in addition to the appropriate radiograph and heat treatment markings applied directly under the
Code Symbol?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Use of ASME Marking
File: BC92-152
Question: May a pressure vessel which was designed in accordance with the rules of ASME Section
VIII, Divisions 1 or 2 but which was not subjected to authorized inspection or Code Symbol stamping be
marked on the nameplate with such information as "Design Code: ASME Section VIII, Divisions 1 or 2"?
Reply: No. Such use of the term "ASME" on the nameplate is not in conformance with the
"Statement of Policy on the Use of ASME Marking to Identify Manufactured Items," which appears in
the front of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2. That policy includes the sentence: "Markings such as 'ASME,
"ASME Standard,' or any other marking including 'ASME' or the various Code Symbols shall not be used
on any item which is not constructed in accordance with all of the applicable requirements of the Code."

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); UW-2(b) and Fig. 9-5 Sketches
(f-1) and (g-5)
File: BC91-629
Question: Is it the intent that the configurations as shown in Fig. 9-5 sketches (f-1) and (g-5) of
Section VIII, Division 1 are permissible on a jacketed vessel when the provisions of UW-2(b) are
applicable to both the inner vessel and the jacket?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); UW-2(b) and Fig. 9-5 Sketches
(f-1) and (g-5)
File: BC91-629*
Question: Are the configurations shown in Fig. 9-5 sketches (f-1) and (g-5) of Section VIII,
Division 1 permissible on a jacketed vessel when the provisions of UW-2(b) are applicable to both the
inner vessel and the jacket?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Appendix CC, CC-4(c)
File: BC92-148
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of CC-4(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 to have
longitudinal weld seams made after segments have been formed into expansion elements?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-81(a) and AF-135(a)
File: BC92-150
Question: Is the requirement "The knuckle radius shall be not less than that specified," in UG-81(a)
and AF-135(a) of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, satisfied by meeting the provisions of
UG-32(h) and (j) and AD-204.4?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UW-40(f) and Appendix 3
File: BC92-167
Question (1): When determining the postweld heat treatment requirements for a nozzle attachment per
UW-40(f) of Section VIII, Division 1, is the thickness of the weld through the head or shell determined
from the nominal thickness of the head or shell material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the definition of nominal thickness in Appendix 3 compatible with the provisions of
UW-40(f)?
Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): When a head is ordered and supplied to a minimum gauge thickness, can this be used for
the nominal thickness?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-84(i)(2)
File: BC92-169
Question: Would it be necessary to have vessel impact test plates made for welding procedures used
on joints of Category C and D under the provisions of UG-84(i)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC92-171
Question: If spot radiography is specified for an entire vessel, is examination required for Category
B or C butt welds when either of the limitations for NPS or wall thickness given in UW-11(b) of Section
VIII, Division 1 is exceeded?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-4(b), UG-13, UCS-5(b), and
UCS-11
File: BC92-173
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-4(b) and UCS-5(b) in Section VIII,
Division 1 to weld SA-194 Grade 7 nuts, with a 0.37% to 0.49% carbon content, to a pressure
containing part where the nuts are being used as nonpressure attachments such as insulation supports?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition); UG-20(f) and UCS-67
File: BC90-683
Question: When material is exempted from impact testing by UG-20(f) of Section VIII, Division 1,
must impact tests per UCS-67 be performed on the longitudinal welds of SA-53 ERW pipe in thicknesses
up to and including 1 in.?
Reply: No.
Note: This Interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Volume 29 of the Interpretations.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-99(a) and UG-100
File: BC92-220
Question: A vessel requires two circumferential vacuum stiffening rings, which due to shipping
constraints cannot be welded to the vessel prior to performing a pneumatic test under the provisions of
UG-100 of Section VIII, Division 1. Two circumferential bands located at the ring center lines are welded
prior to the pneumatic test. The vessel is then tested and shipped to the field site. Is it permissible to weld
the stiffening rings to the bands on the vessel and have a subsequent pneumatic test performed at 1.1
MAWP after which the Code Symbol Stamp would be affixed and witnessed by the Authorized
Inspector?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-27(c)(1)
File: BC92-240
Question: In determining the minimum required thickness for a seamless pipe under UG-27(c)(1) of
Section VIII, Division 1, is a joint efficiency of E = 1.0 the proper value to insert in Formula (1) when
there is no welding performed on the pipe?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (k)
File: BC92-248
Question(1): In Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (k) of Section VIII, Division 1, in determining the dimensional
tolerance 1t min to 2 1/2t max, is the tolerance the distance from the edge of the abutting plate to the end
of the offset?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When using the optional bevel in Fig UW-13.1 sketch (k), is the dimensional tolerance
the distance from the root of the bevel to the end of the offset?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Table UHA-23, Note (8)
File: BC92-249
Question: Table UHA-23 of Section VIII, Division 1 lists maximum allowable stress values at
temperature. If the calculated stress above 1000° F is below the maximum stress value listed, do the
requirements of Note (8) still apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Appendix AA
File: BC92-170
Question (1): Noting that Appendix AA of Section VIII, Division 1 is nonmandatory, is it permissible
to use other methods for the design of tubesheets, in accordance with U-2(g)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If Appendix AA is chosen to design tubesheets, then must all of provisions of Appendix
AA be used?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): When design rules are given in a Nonmandatory Appendix and alternative design rules
are used, in accordance with U-2(g), must that be referenced under Remarks on the Manufacturer's Data
Report Form?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-4(b) and UW-5(b)
File: BC92-216
Question: If nonpressure parts, such as clips and lugs, are cut out from weldable material (i.e. A 36,
A 283, etc.), is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1 that the product marking be transferred to each
piece?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Table UHA-23, Note (1)
File: BC92-226
Question: When designing a flange per Appendix 2, using SA-240 plate material, does Note (1) to
Table UHA-23 require the lower value for the allowable design stress at design temperature given in
Table UHA-23 of Section VIII, Division 1 for the material be used?
Reply: No
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-101(i)
File: BC92-239
Question: UG-101(i) in Section VIII, Division 1 is used to determine the MAWP of vessels tested
and completed under earlier Editions of the Code. When preparing Manufacturer's Data Reports for new
vessels, where their designs were established by proof tests to Editions and Addendas prior to the 1991
Addenda, is it permissible to record under "Remarks" the MAWP and corrosion allowance calculated at
the time of the tests?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-2(a)
File: BC92-246
Question: A vessel is constructed of 316L SS and is designated for lethal service. One end closure
is a carbon steel (SA-105) blind flange to which a 316L stainless steel liner covering the entire raised-face
area has been attached by welding, Does the blind flange require PWHT as noted in UW-2(a) of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66
File: BC90-247
Question: Is there a requirement for Part UCS material conforming to SA-333 and SA-350 to be
assigned to a curve in Fig. UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. The materials cited in the Question are required to be impact tested by their
individual specifications; therefore, there is no need to assign them to a curve in Fig. UCS-66.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); UG-125 and M-8(b)
File: BC92-116
Question (1): Are multiple or redundant pressure reducing valves and similar mechanical or electrical
instruments either as part of a process control system or a protective safety system considered under the
requirements of UG-125 in Section VIII, Division 1 sufficiently positive enough to prevent excess
pressures from being developed. That is, may such reliable instrument systems be used in place of a
safety relief device(s)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are multiple or redundant pressure reducing valves and similar mechanical or electrical
instruments either as part of a process control system or a protective safety system considered under the
requirements of UG-125 in Section VIII, Division 1 sufficiently positive enough to prevent excess
pressures from being developed? That is, may such reliable instrument systems be used to reduce the
required capacity of a safety relief device(s)?
Reply (2): See Question (3) and Reply (3) of Interpretation VIII-1-83-29.
Question (3): Would the provision of process control or protective safety instruments which would
reduce the number of relief devices discharging simultaneously be acceptable in meeting the guidelines of
M-8(b) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Appendix M, M-8(b)
File: BC92-116*
Question: When sizing a common header per Appendix M, M-8(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, may
the effects of process controls and other safety and operating systems, which do not reduce the relieving
capacity of a safety device(s), be considered when determining which relieving devices may reasonably
be expected to discharge simultaneously?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-14
File: BC87-296
Question: In accordance with UG-14 of Section VIII, Division 1, may shells of pressure vessels be
machined from rod or bar material?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Use of Standard Couplings
File: BC91-080
Question: May an internally threaded fitting which meets the requirements of UW-16(f) in Section
VIII, Division 1, including all applicable UG-22 loadings, be used for Section VIII, Division 1
construction, whether or not it is in accordance with ANSI standards?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Table UW-12, Type No. 3
File: BC92-310
Question: Must the limitation requirements for Type No. (3) joints given in Table UW-12 of
Section VIII, Division 1 be met to satisfy the provisions of the Table?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-116(c) and UCS-66(b)
File: BC92-319
Question (1): May the requirements of UCS-66(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 be used for a pressure
vessel that is permanently mounted on a truck, trailer, or portable skid? The vessel is operated under
pressure at a specific location for a period of several months and then moved to another location. The
vessel is not pressurized during transportation.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, does the provision of UG-116(b), in marking the vessel
with the lettering NPV (nonstationary pressure vessel), apply to the vessel permanently mounted on a
truck, trailer, or portable skid, when such a vessel is not pressurized during transportation to its
operational site?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-135(b)
File: BC92-321
Question: Do the requirements of UG-135(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 permit the installation of a
check valve at the inlet of the PSV (between the vessel and its pressure relieving device)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda); Fine Grain Practice
File: BC90-678
Question: Is it the intent of the Code that "fine grain practice" be defined in accordance with SA-
20?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Appendix 17
File: BC92-010
Question: Is it the intent of the 1990 Addenda to the 1989 Edition of Section VIII, Division 1,
Appendix 17, to permit the use of plasma arc welding with the thickness limits noted in Table 174.1, and
with the same controls as required for tungsten arc seam welding without the addition of filler metal per
17-1(b)(4)?
Reply: Yes,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix 17, 17-1(a)(1) and (e) and Form U-1
File: BC92-345
Question: A plain plate is to be covered by a jacket fabricated in accordance with the provisions of
Appendix 17, 17-1(a)(1) and (e), of Section VIII, Division 1. Category A and B Type No. (1) weld will
join the two. No radiography is to be performed, and only the jacketed surface will meet the requirements
of the Code. Is it necessary to document, under Item 14 of Manufacturer's Data Report Form U-1, the
joint efficiency for the inner chamber of the jacketed vessel when the provisions of UG-47 and UW-19(c)
are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UHA-51(b)(5)(b)
File: BC92-343
Question: Does the reference to "specific type base material" in UHA-51(b)(5)(b), Section
VIII, Division 1 mean P-Number and Group Number as given in QW-403.5 of Section IX?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Table UCS-56, Notes (2)(a) and (2)(b) for P-No.
4 Material
File: BC92-290
Question: Tubes are welded to a tubesheet using partial penetration groove or fillet welds. For P-
No. 4, Gr. Nos. 1 and 2 material, is postweld heat treatment required per UCS-56 of Section VIII,
Division 1, if the exemptions of Notes (2)(a) and (2)(b) are complied with?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition); UG-120(c) and AS-310(a)
File: BC92-295
Question: Are Partial Data Reports, under the requirements of UG-120(c) and AS-310(a) in Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, required in the case where seamless heads are formed, and where
temporary lugs are welded to the heads, by a parts Manufacturer and supplied to the vessel Manufacturer?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-90, UG-96, and Appendices 10 and W
File: BC92-304
Question (1): Is the minimum required thickness value for heads, required as an entry on
Manufacturer's Data Report Forms U-1, U-1A, U-2, and U-2A, the same value given in the vessel
Manufacturer's purchase order to the head manufacturer?
Reply (1): Minimum thickness ordered from head manufacturer may be greater than that shown on
Form U-1.
Question (2): Does circled Note No. 28 of Table W-3 establish the requirement for verifying the
minimum required head thickness after forming?
Reply (2): No. See UG-90 and UG-96.
Question (3): Is it required that the methods used to verify design and fabrication criteria be included in
the vessel Manufacturer's Quality Control System?
Reply (3): Yes. See 10-1 and 10-15 of Appendix 10.

Question (4): Do the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 provide for the number of measurements,
or locations where such measurements are taken, to satisfy provisions of UG-96?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): May the head manufacturer, acting on behalf of the vessel Manufacturer, verify and
certify that the requirements of UG-81 and UG-96 have been met?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-12 and Table UW-12
File: BC92-317
Question: A vessel is constructed using a series of longitudinal single-welded butt joints and a
closing longitudinal lap joint weld. The closing longitudinal lap is a single full fillet exterior weld without
plug welds. Does this closing lap joint constitute a Category A, Type No. 6 weld under the requirements
of Table UW-12 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-84(h)(3)
File: BC92-334
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-84(h)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1, must the
second set of impact specimens be taken as near as practical midway between the opposite surface and the
center line of the test weld?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix EE
File: BC92-344
Question: A half-pipe jacket is welded to the outside of a vessel wall. The angle of intersection
between the wall of the jacket and the shell is 90 deg. (similar to the upper sketch in Fig. EE-4 of Section
VIII, Division 1). May this joint be considered a Category C weld joint?
Reply: The Code does not categorize this type of construction; see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition); UW-31(c) and AF-140.1
File: BC92-349
Question: In complying with the requirements of UW-31(c) and AF-140.1 of Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, are tack weld procedure specifications and procedure qualification tests
required to include impact testing and PWHT even though such welds are removed completely?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-133(d)
File: BC92-351
Question: UG-133(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 calls for overpressure protection of heat
exchangers for the case of internal failure. Do the requirements of the Code address the condition
of external fire for such an exchanger?
Reply: Yes. See UG-125(c)(2) and UG-133(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-2(a), Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (e), and Fig.
UW-16.1 Sketch (d)
File: BC92-352
Question (1): Are Category C and D butt welds required to be fully radiographed when the vessel is to
be stamped for lethal service?
Reply (1): Yes, except for those Category C butt welds exempted under UW-11(a)(4).
Question (2): Are the welds shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (e) and Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (d) butt
welds?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-118(b)
File: BC92-355
Question: A 2:1 semiellipsoidal head is inserted partially through a cylindrical shell (less than a 1/4
in. thick). The portion of the shell outside the pressure boundary is used as a skirt. May the required
marking of UG-116 in Section VIII, Division 1 be stamped directly on the skirt portion of the shell?
Reply: Yes, see UG-119.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-2(c)
File: BC92-376
Question: Is a 175 psi, 250° F hot water electric boiler, to be fabricated under the provisions of
Section VIII, Division 1, exempted from the radiographic examination requirements in UW-2(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-99(f)
File: BC92-389
Question: Are the requirements of UG-99(f) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable for a single-wall
vessel designed and stamped for internal pressure of 8.7 psi and full vacuum?
Reply: The hydrostatic test in the vessel shall be the larger of that obtained by the rules of UG-
99(f) for external pressure, or UG-99(b) or (c) for internal pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-37(d)(2) and Fig. 9-6
File: BC90-657
Question (1): Is there a conflict between the requirements in UG-37(d)(2) and 9-6(b) of Section VIII,
Division 1 in so far as they pertain to reinforcement provisions?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does the Code address requirements for the situation where nozzle openings in a shell, as
shown in Fig. 9-6 sketch (a), must be reinforced for external pressure due to pressure in the jacket
chamber?
Reply (2): Yes. See UG-37(d)(2).
Question (3): Does the Code address requirements for the situation where nozzle openings in a shell, as
shown in Fig. 9-6 sketches (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f), must be reinforced for external pressure due to
pressure in the jacket chamber?
Reply (3): No. See U-2(g).
File: BC92-056
Question: May the MAWP of vessels of spiral wound construction be established by a proof
test in accordance with UG-101 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. Rules for spiral wound layered vessels already exist in both ASME Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Table W-3, Circled Note No. 53
File: BC92-104
Question: May impact testing exemptions as described in UCS-66(a), (c), and (d) of Section VIII,
Division 1 be summarized under "Remarks" on the Data Report Form as "UCS-66" without adding the
applicable subparagraph letters?
Reply: No.
gbk
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition); Appendix 2
File: BC90-192
Question: A hubless flange ring that has been cut from plate is to be fabricated per Fig. 2-4 sketch
(8), and calculated as an optional integral type. Per General Note (b) of Fig 2-4, the loadings and
dimensions not shown in sketch (8) are taken from Fig 2-4 sketch (7). When performing design
calculations for this flange, is the dimension h to be taken as equal to the fillet leg parallel to the axis of
the flange, and g, equal to the other fillet leg plus g.?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-37 and UG-40
File: BC92-388
Question: May Interpretation VIII-81-28 be used in conjunction with the requirements of the 1992
Edition of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-11(c)
File: BC92-405
Question: May an ANSI product standard, e.g., a blind flange, which has been modified by welding
heating elements to it through drilled holes be furnished as a miscellaneous pressure part, i.e.,
Manufacturer's standard, if the requirements of UG-11(c)(1) through UG-11(c)(2) in Section VIII,
Division 1 are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix 2, 2-9
File: BC92-299
Question: Are the requirements of 2-9 of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to the design of split
flange assembled with a full-face spacer bar between them?
Reply: Section VIII, Division 1 does not have rules for this type of construction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Fig. UCS-66, General Notes
File: BC92-406
Question: A Fig. UCS-66 Curve A material, SA-387 Grade 11 Class 2, is purchased normalized and
to a fine grain practice. For impact test exemption requirements, the material falls under Curve B of Fig.
UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 by virtue of General Note (b)(2) of Fig. UCS-66. May this material
also fall under Curve C as outlined in General Note (c)(2) of Fig. UCS-66?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix W, Data Report Form U-1
File: BC92-454
Question: In the boxed table under item 6 of Form U-1 in Section VIII, Division 1, is the entry to be
placed in the first column under "No." the numerical number assigned to the courses?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UCS-67(a)
File: BC92-457
Question: The requirements of UCS-67(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 state that welds made with
filler metal shall be impact tested when either base metal is required to be impact tested. May a WPS be
used for such welds when the WPS has not been developed to include provisions for impact testing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Applied Coating Prior to Hydro
File: BC92-458
Question: Are there any requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 which would limit the thickness of
an external paint coating on a vessel at the time of hydrostatic test?
Reply: No.
File: BC93-140
Question (1): May welded attachments to a shell with a MDMT colder than -50° F, and for which the
rules in UCS-68 of Section VIII, Division 1 require postweld heat treatment, be attached by welding after
the required postweld heat treatment?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When considering attachments by welding, does the "coincident ratio of design stress in
tension to allowable tensile stress" as referenced in UCS-68 apply only to the attachment weld?
Reply (2): No; see UCS-66(a)(3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-80(a)(1) and UG-81(a)
File: BC92-275
Question: UG-81(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 refers to deviation from specified shape. Are there
any requirements for out-of-roundness limitations on a conical portion of a toriconical head if it is
designed for internal pressure only?
Reply: Yes. See UG-80(a)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (d) and Appendix 2, 2-
1(e)(2)
File: BC92-383
Question: A small diameter separator has a flat head bolted to a reverse flange. The gasket is a full
face compressible type. Is it permissible under the provisions of 2-1(e)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 to
base the flange to shell joint on U-2(g), where the design of the joint would be made similar to that in Fig.
UW-13.2 sketch (d)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-84(g)(4)
File: BC92-404
Question: Material is tested at a temperature given in Table A1.15 of SA-20, and this temperature is
lower than the minimum design metal temperature (MDMT) of the vessel. Under the requirements of UG-
84(g)(4) [previous to the 1991 Addenda noted as UG-84(g)(3)] in Section VIII, Division 1, do the weld
procedure qualification impact tests have to be performed at a lower temperature than the minimum
design metal temperature?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UW-16(f)
File: BC92-459
Question: May a flanged nozzle, NPS 3 or less, fabricated from standard seamless or welded pipe,
be considered a pipe fitting under the requirements of UW-16(f) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix 10, 10-15(d)
File: BC93-029
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, 10-15(d), require that the Authorized Inspector to verify
provisions within a Manufacturer's written procedure, which may exceed Code requirements, in particular
with regard to safety activities which the Manufacturer may establish for his shop personnel in a pressure
testing procedure?
Reply: No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition); Appendix M, M-5 and M-6
File: BC90-728
Question(1): Is a full port valve considered to be the equivalent of the full area stop valve mentioned in
M-5 and M-6 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): What is meant by a full port or full area valve?
Reply (2): A full port valve is defined as a valve whose minimum bore diameter is as specified in
Annex A of ASME/ANSI B16.34-1988, Valves-Flanged, Threaded and Welding End. Annex A provides
the inside diameter of valves and fittings as a function of their nominal pipe size and pressure-temperature
rating class.
Question (3): Does full area stop valve mean full area with respect to the nominal pipe size of the relief
valve inlet?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition); Appendix M, M-5 an M-6
File: BC90-728*
Question (1): May a full port block valve be used as a full area stop valve as allowed in Appendix M,
M-5 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the full port block valve meets the requirements of UG-135(b).
Question (2): When a full area stop valve is installed between a pressure vessel and its pressure
relieving device, as permitted in Appendix M, what does the term full area mean?
Reply (2): It means that the minimum flow area through the stop valve must be equal to or greater
than the flow area at the inlet of the pressure relief device, as required by UG-135(b).
Question (3): Does a full or reduced port stop valve meet the requirements of UG-135(b) if the
minimum cross-sectional area of the stop valve port is less than the cross-sectional area of the inlet to the
pressure relief device?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): Is a reduced area stop valve acceptable if the cross-sectional area of the valve port is less
than the cross-sectional area of the piping between the pressure vessel and the stop valve, but greater than
the cross-sectional area of the inlet of the pressure relief device?
Reply (4): Yes, if the system meets the requirements of UG-135(b).

File: BC92-093
Question: Does a buckling pin emergency shutdown valve satisfy the requirements of UG-125 as an
acceptable protective device for ASME Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessels?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Fig. UCS-66
File: BC92-455
Question: For centrifically cast material, e.g., SA-216 Grade WCB fine grain and normalized,
operating at a metal temperature of + 20°F and warmer, may Curve D of Fig. UCS-66 be used to
determine exemption from impact testing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UHA-51
File: BC92-456
Question: In using the requirements of UHA-51 in Section VIII, Division 1 for other than base
materials, where the metal temperature is +20° F or warmer, may the requirements for impact testing be
waived for those materials, including the welds?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-46(f)(2)
File: BC93-031
Question: Would the requirements of UG-46(f)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 be met if a 36 in. ID
vessel, operating in corrosive service, was provided with one NPS 3 and three NPS 1.5 threaded openings
and no manhole, where the total area of all the openings would be equal to the required two NPS 2
threaded openings?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); Appendix 2, 2-8(a)(1)(a)
File: BC93-041
Question: Is footnote CI:26 of Table 1A in Section II, Part D applicable in determining Sn as given
in 2-8(a)(1)(a) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Table UW-12
File: BC93-110
Questions: Under the limitation requirements for Type No. (3) joints given in Table UW-12 of
Section VIII, Division 1, may the following be single welded and still be in compliance using only
circumferential butt joints:
(1) Weld a vessel that has a 3/8 in. thick wall and is 20 in. in diameter?
(2) Weld a vessel that has a 3/8 in. thick wall and is 30 in. in diameter?
Replies:
(1) No.
(2) No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); U-1(g)(3)
File: BC93-032
Question: Under the requirements of U-1(g)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1, does the Scope require
that a vessel be constructed to the Code when such a vessel is electrically heated and steam is generated in
excess of 15 psi but not withdrawn for external use?
Reply: Yes; however, see footnote 1 of page 1 of the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-101(m)
File: BC93-052
Question (1): Are there any requirements in the Code which address what would constitute rupture as it
pertains to the provisions of UG-101(m) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-101(a)(2).

Question (2): Does the leakage at gasketed joints due to localized yielding (flanges, etc.) constitute
rupture of the vessel?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): If the Reply (2) is no, then can methods (such as using o-rings or welded plugs over
openings) be employed at such areas to permit attaining higher hydrostatic pressure on the vessel walls?
Reply (3): No.
File: BC93-036
Question: Would the requirements of UG-77(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 be met if a self adhesive
label containing all the proper marking information were used for each part? The removal of the label
would require the willful destruction of the label.
Reply: Yes, provided the Manufacturer's QA manual addresses this procedure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66 and UCS-67(b)
File: BC93-104
Question(1): A heat exchanger is designed using SA-335 P11 normalized material for the shell and
SA-234 WP11 fully annealed material for the head. In determining whether impact testing is required,
would Curve C in Fig. UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 be the proper location for the material noted?
Reply (1): No. See General Note (b)(3) of Fig. UCS-66.

Question (2): Are the requirements of UCS-67(b) applicable for the conditions stated in Question (1)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC93-105
Question: May the ends of the portion of welded staybolts that extend into 45 deg beveled holes in
stayed plates be beveled to approximately 20 deg, where the diameter d used in design calculations is
taken to be no more than the smallest diameter of the staybolt where welded to the stay plate, and meet
the intent of UW-19(a)(1)?
Reply: Yes. Also see Fig. UW-19.1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66, General Notes
File: BC93-349
Question: For determining impact test exemption criteria under the General Notes of Fig. UCS-66
in Section VIII, Division 1, would SA-106 Grade B pipe be assigned to Curve B?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-116(h)
File: BC93-113
Question: A welded pressure part requiring compliance to UG-120(c) is constructed. Does UG-
116(h) in Section VIII, Division 1 require all of the marking criteria shown in Fig. UG-118 in addition to
the requirement given in UG-116(g)(1)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); U-2(g)
File: BC93-373
Question: In the use of U-2(g) provisions in Section VIII, Division 1, would it be permissible to use
finite element analysis for designs not specifically covered by the rules of the Code?
Reply: The rules of the Code do not prohibit the use of any design method in complying with the
requirements of U-2(g) as long as the method is agreed upon by the Manufacturer, user, and Authorized
Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UCS-56 and UCS-57
File: BC93-418
Question: Carbon steel stiffener rings are welded to the shell of a horizontal pressure vessel
supported by saddles. Are the ring splice welds required to be postweld heat treated and radiographed
under the provisions of UCS-56 and UCS-57, respectively, in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-120(a) and (c)
File: BC93-421
Question (1): Under the requirements of UG-120(a) and UG-120(c), must a Manufacturer who chooses
to register a pressure vessel, constructed under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, with the
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors also supply, in addition to the Manufacturer's
Data Report Form, any Partial Data Report Forms when they are provided for parts used in the
construction of the completed pressure vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the Reply (1) is yes, must the Partial Data Report Forms accompany the Manufacturer's
Data Report Form, when the parts are registered with the National Board and all required information on
the Partial Data Report Forms is indicated on the Manufacturer's Data Report Form for the completed
vessel?
Reply (2): Yes. See UG-120(c).
File: BC93-111
Question(1): Do materials that are manufactured to an ASTM specification and are stated in the
material specification in Section II, Parts A and B to be identical, and which have been adopted by
Section VIII, Division 1, require recertification under the rules of UG-10?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Do materials that are manufactured to an ASTM specification and for which a companion
ASME specification has not been adopted by Section VIII, Division 1, require recertification under the
rules of UG-10?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May welding materials conforming to an AWS specification, but not an SFA
specification, be used in Section VIII, Division 1 construction, as given in UG-9, without recertification
under UG-10?
Reply (3): Yes, provided the provisions of the welding procedure specification are met.
File: ' BC93-112
Question: Is it a requirement of UG-133(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 that no valve(s) can be

located in the piping between interconnected pressure vessels, even though means would exist to prevent
the valve(s) from being closed?
Reply: No. See M-5(b) for guidance.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-35(d)
File: BC93-114
Question(1): Do head attachments per sketch (k) of Fig. UW-13.1 in Section VIII, Division 1 have to
meet the maximum reinforcement requirements of UW-35(d)?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it permissible to use the maximum reinforcement values for circumferential joints
given in UW-35(d) even when the shell of the vessel is made from rolled sheet steel?
Reply (2): No.
Interpretation, VIII-1-92-151R
File: BC93-114*
Question (1): Do head attachments per sketch (k) of Fig. UW-13.1 in Section VIII, Division 1 have to
meet the maximum reinforcement requirements of UW-35(d)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to exceed the maximum reinforcement values for circumferential joints
given in UW-35(d) when the shell of the vessel is made from rolled sheet steel?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-136(b)(3), UCS-10, and
UCS-12(b)
File: BC93-138
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-136(b)(3), UCS-10, and UCS-12(b) in

Section VIII, Division 1 to use SA-194 416 type nuts as bar material for use in valve body construction?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-11 and UCS-56
File: BC93-358
Question: When postweld heat treatment is required for P-No. 5 material (5Cr-1/2 Mo) as per UCS-
56 of Section VIII, Division 1, is the welding process considered complete before postweld heat
treatment?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-36(c)(3)(a), (3)(b), and
(3)(c)
File: BC93-359
Question (1): If any two openings in a vessel are spaced less than two times their average diameter, as
given in UG-36(c)(3)(c), and one of the openings falls under the provisions of UG-36(c)(3)(a) or UG-
6(c)(3)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, do the requirements of UG-42 apply?
Reply (1): Yes, except for UG-36(c)(3)(d).
Question (2): Given the specifics of Question (1), do the requirements of UG-37 apply?
Reply (2): Yes, except for UG-36(c)(3)(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); Appendix 13, Fig. 13-2(a)
Sketches (7), (8), (9), and (10) and Equations in 13-9
File: BC92-103
Question: In Fig. 13-2(a), sketches (7), (8), (9), and (10) of Section VIII, Division 1 and in the
equations in 13-9, may the h dimension be greater than, equal to, or less than the H dimension?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-32(d) and UG-81(a)
File: BC92-419
Question: For a 2:1 ellipsoidal head approximated by fabricating with a spherical radius of 0.9D
and a knuckle of 0.17D, may the knuckle radius be less than that specified?
Reply: No, see UG-81(a)
File: BC93-439
Question: May standard long weld neck flanges, which comply with the design and rating
requirements of ANSI B16.5, for SA-350 LF2 material (fine grain practice and normalized) be assigned
to Curve C of Fig. UCS-66?
Reply: SA-350 LF2 allows the material to be used down to -50°F. Thus, the Curves of Fig. UCS-
66 are not applicable. See General Note (c) of Fig. UG-84.1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Table UW-12, Type No. 1 Joints
File: BC93-460
Question: Would welding the root pass with GTAW and using a consumable insert meet the
requirements of the Joint Description for Type No. 1 joints in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of UW-35 are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-116(e)
File: BC93-481
Question (1): A welded pressure vessel is fabricated with Type No. 1 joints, and the requirements of
UW-11(a)(1), (2), (3), and (4) are not applicable. The Category A and D butt welds are fully
radiographed. There are no Category C welds. If the Category B welds are spot radiographed per the
requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b), would the required marking on the nameplate, outlined in UG-116(e) of
Section VIII, Division 1, be "RT2"?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the vessel give (given) in Question (1), if Category B welds are not radiographed,
would the required marking be "RT4"?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-32(l) and UW-13(b)(4)
File: BC93-486
Question: A skirt is provided for a formed head as permitted under the requirements of UG-32(l) in
Section VIII, Division 1. May an offset, as permitted by UW-13(b)(4), occur at the tangent line, and the
head thickness in the final construction be the minimum as required by UG-32 in the formed part of the
ellipsoidal or torispherical head?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC93-513
Question: Does UW-39(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, preclude the use of sand blasting for
cleaning the surface of vessels or vessel parts?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-116(e)(2)
File: BC93-510
Question: In constructing a vessel using a seamless shell and ellipsoidal heads where the spot
radiography requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) have been applied, would it be acceptable to mark the
nameplate with either the "RT-2" or "RT-4" designation?
Reply: No. The requirements of UG-116(e)(2) are applicable, and the designation "RT-2" shall
be marked on the nameplate.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-98(a) and (b)
File: BC93-540
Question: A pressure vessel is designed for internal and external pressure. Do the provisions of
UG-98 in Section VIII, Division 1, require only the internal pressure be stamped on the nameplate for the
MAWP?
Reply: No. Both internal and external pressures must be stamped.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); U-1(c)(3)
File: BC93-503
Question: Are filter presses, rated for MAWP's greater than 15 psi, which consist of a multiplicity
of gasketed filter elements secured by mechanical or other means between a fixed and a movable cover,
within scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-35(a) and Table UW-12
File: BC93-397
Question: A Type No. 1 butt joint as described in UW-12(c) and listed in Table UW-12, Column C,
is visually examined only without any radiographic examination. Does the weld comply with UW-35(a)
of Section III, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Reference to Dual Marked
Material in Manufacturer's Data Report Forms
File: BC93-399
Question(1): May a dual stenciled material (e.g., SA-240 304/304L) be listed as SA-240 304, SA-240
304L, or SA-240 304/304L in the Manufacturer's Data Report Forms when using only one set of design
allowables for the particular Grade designation?
Reply (1): No, the material shall be listed as the material grade chosen from the allowable stress
tables.
Question (2): If the dual stenciled material is listed as SA-240 304, may the "Remarks" section of the
Manufacturer's Data Report Form contain the phrase " The shelf and bottom head material meet all the
requirements of SA-240 304 and SA-240 304L"?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC93-411
Question(1): May welding be performed at a contractor's location if all the requirements of UW-26(d)
in Section VIII, Division 1, are addressed in the ASME Certificate Holder's Quality Control Manual and
are met?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is "Yes," does the ASME Certificate Holder's Certificate of
Authorization need to be extended to the field site?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC93-448
Question: Under the provisions of UG-8 in Section VIII, Division 1, may SA-312 pipe material be
used in Code construction when such pipe was weld repaired with filler metal by the material supplier in
accordance with the requirements of the material specification?
Reply: Yes, this is permitted by the material specification.
File: BC93-485
Question: Are rounded indications (porosity) that do not extend through the wall and do not exceed
the maximum permissible size in Appendix 4 of Section VIII, Division 1 acceptable without further
work?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-16(e)(2) and Fig. UW-16.1
Sketch (w)
File: BC93-489
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UW-16(e)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 to

allow the nozzle attachment weld similar to that shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (w) to be on the outside,
if the same limits on the size of the fillet and gap G are maintained?
Reply: The provisions of the Code would not prohibit such an attachment.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UNF-58(a) and (b)
File: BC92-453
Question: Are laser welded lap welds as permitted by Code Case 2018-1 required to follow UNF-
58(a) and (b) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-4(b) and UW-4(b)
File: BC92-460
Question: If material is identified, received, and accepted as an ASME recognized material, is it

acceptable to mark temporary and nonpressure attachments fabricated from this material with only the
ASME Section IX assigned P-Number?
Reply: Yes, provided this method of identification is described in the approved Quality Control
System.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UCS-67(a)
File: BC93-591
Question: A vessel is exempted from impact testing by UG-20(f) and/or UCS-66 of Section VIII,
Division 1, and its MDMT is -20°F; may a flux/wire combination, impact rated at 0°F by its
manufacturer, be used in the construction of the vessel?
Reply: Yes. See UCS-67(e)(1).
File: BC93-604
Question: Do the reinforcement requirements of UW-35(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to

weld joints other than longitudinal and circumferencial butt joints, e.g., fillet welds of nozzles and
couplings?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-84 and ]Part UCL
File: BC93-638
Question(1): Are there any requirements in Part UCL of Section VIII, Division 1, for impact testing
when qualifying a welding procedure for applying corrosion resistant weld metal overlay?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any requirements in UG-84 of Section VIII, Division 1, for production impact
test plates when corrosion resistant weld metal overlay is used in fabrication of a pressure vessel?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-40(f)(6) and Table UCS-56
File: BC93-641
Question(1): Is it acceptable under the requirements of UW-40(f)(6) and Note (2)(a) of P-No. 1 in
Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1, to perform no preheat or PWHT on repair welds up to 1 1/4 in.
thick, irrespective of the thickness of the parent material?
Reply (1): Yes, unless PWHT is required by Note (3).
Question (2): Is it acceptable under the requirements of UW-40(f)(6) and Note (2)(a) of P-No. 1 in
Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1, to perform no PWHT on repair welds over 1 1/4 through 1 1/2
in. thick, irrespective of the thickness of the parent material, if a preheat of 200° F is employed?
Reply (2): Yes, unless PWHT is required by Note (3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-136(b)(2)
File: BC93-583A
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-136(b)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1, is the
application of corrosion resistant coating by the Manufacturer to springs considered "part modification"?
Reply: No, provided the coating application is part of the valve certification.
File: BC93-588
Question: Does the term tmin as shown in Fig. UW-16.1, and as described in the nomenclature of
UW-16(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, satisfy all Code design and fabrication requirements?
Reply: No, tmin as used in Fig. UW-16.1 addresses fabrication requirements only.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-91, UG-120(a), AI-
102(b)(12), and AI-110
File: BC93-590
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-120(a) and AI-102(b)(12) in Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, respectively, for an inspector, who is employed by other than the Authorized
Inspection Agency of record, to sign Manufacturer's Data Report Forms if his inspection activities have
been defined in the Certificate Holder's Quality Control Manual, and he has verified himself that all
applicable Code requirements have been complied with?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC93-627
Question: Are forgings, fabricated under SA-266, permitted for nozzle flanges and standard piping
components under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, however, note that piping components are not covered by the Scope of Section VIII,
Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-84(i)(1) and AT-
203(b)
File: BC93-629
Question: Would a vessel test plate meet the requirements of being welded "...immediately prior to
the start of production welding..." as required in UG-84(i)(1) and AT-203(b) of Section VIII, Divisions 1
and 2, respectively, if the test plate were welded only sufficiently in advance to allow for prompt heat
treatment and impact testing to be completed prior to the start of production welding?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Table UCS-56, Note (3)(b) of P-
No. 1
File: BC93-647
Question: When a full penetration groove and fillet weld is used in combination, is the exemption
requirement of Note (3)(b) for P-No. 1 material in Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1, applicable
to the thickness of the combined welds?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Table UCS-56, Note (2)(a) of P-
No. 4 Material
File,. BC93-648
Question: Is PWHT a necessity under Note (2)(a) for P-No. 4 material in Table UCS-56 of Section
VIII, Division 1, for a tube-to-tubesheet weld when the tube material is SA-213 Gr. T11 and the tubesheet
material is nonferrous, e.g., Inconel?
Reply: No, see UNF-56(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Table UCS-56, Note (2) (a)of P-
No. 4 Material
File: BC93-648*
Question: Is PWHT a necessity under Note (2) (a) for P-No. 4 material in Table UCS-56 of Section
VIII, Division 1, for a tube-to-tubesheet weld when the tube material is SA-213 Gr. T11 and the tubesheet
material is nonferrous, e.g., Inconel?
Reply: Yes.
File-. BC93-621
Question: Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1, when using the provisions of UG-22 to
include stresses from vessel supports, or self-relieving secondary stresses, in determining the coincident
design conditions for a vessel?
Reply: UG-22 lists those loadings which shall be considered. The Code does not give the method
of analysis nor the allowable stresses in many cases. This responsibility is described in U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Figs. UW-13.2 and 9-5
File: BC93-650
Question: Is it permissible to use the value of the required thickness for the dimensions and
calculations shown in Figs. UW-13.2 and 9-5 of Section VIII, Division 1, instead of the actual thickness,
as required by the Code?
Reply: No.
File: BC93-652
Question: Would it be required under UCS-66 of Section VIII, Division 1 to re-impact test material
that requires a -10° F MDMT when it has been tested and accepted for a -40°F MDMT?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-20(f) and UCS-67(c)
File: BC93-683
Question: A pressure vessel shell is made from electric resistance welded pipe material listed for
Curve B in Fig. UCS-66. It has a thickness over 1/2 in. but under 1 in. and the impact test exemption of
UG-84(g)(3) does not apply. If all the requirements of UG-20(f) are met, must the vessel Manufacturer
perform impact testing of the electric resistance welded longitudinal seam weld in accordance with UCS-
67(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, when no impact testing was performed by the material manufacturer
and an MDMT of -20° F is desired?
Reply: No.
File: BC92-207
Question(1): Does Section VIII, Division 1, UG-125(a) and UG-126 prohibit the use of reverse acting
pilot operated safety/relief valves (i.e., system pressure to close, spring force to open) for overpressure
protection?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does the use of an external power source in conjunction with a pilot operated pressure
relief valve comply with Section VIII, Division 1, UG-126(b) when this power source has no influence on
the main valve's ability to open fully at the set pressure?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition); UG-93(a)(1)
File: BC93-034
Question: Does UG-93(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, allow the transmittal of a transcribed copy
of the material test report to the vessel Manufacturer with each "just in time" delivery of materials from a
warehouse/storage facility who is in partnership with the Manufacturer, where control and retention of the
MTR's has been delegated to the facility by the Manufacturer?
Reply: No; see Interpretation VIII-78-104.
File: BC93-145
Question: Is it the intent of UG-119(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 to require that serial numbers be
applied on a nameplate only by stamping?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)
File: BC93-741
Question: Does the word "...either..." in 17-7(a)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 imply that the
representative panel could be less than 24 in. in one direction if it is at least 5 pitches in both directions?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-15 and UW-16(f)(5)
File: BC93-717
Question: Are fillet weld strength calculations, as mandated in UW-15, required if the provisions of
UW-16(f)(5) in Section VIII, Division 1 are met?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-012
Question: Material specification SB-409 in Section II, Part B tinder subpara. 9.1 does not address
weld repairs. Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-78 in Section VIII, Division 1 to weld repair
injurious imperfections in SB-409 plate material prior to using the plate in the construction of a pressure
vessel even though the material specification does not specifically address such repair?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-2(a)(1)(b)
File: BC93-684
Question (1): A heat exchanger consisting of rectangular header boxes is designed in accordance with
Appendix 13 of Section VIII, Division 1. Each header has full penetration angle joints located at the four
corners. The end plates are attached by a single sided full penetration angle joint. Do these types of joints
meet the requirements of UW-2(a)(1)(b) for lethal service when interpretable radiographs can be
produced for the full length of the welds?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do these types of joints satisfy UW-2(a)(1)(b) if interpretable radiographs cannot be
obtained, but ultrasonic examination is performed for the full length of the welds?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC93-670
Question: When calculating the required thickness of seamless flat heads attached by corner joint
welds, or by bolting, using the provisions of UG-34 in Section VIII, Division 1, is the proper value of E,
0.85?
Reply: No. See definition of E in UG-34(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-101(j)
File: BC93-734
Question: A dimpled jacket is fabricated in accordance with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1,
Appendix 17-1(c) and UW-19(c)(2) using SA-240 material, and is required to be proof tested according to
UG-101(m). SA-240 does not specify maximum tensile strength. In UG-101(j)(2) is it permissible to use
the average of the tensile strength values provided in the material test reports as the value Sµ avg, when
calculating the maximum allowable working pressure according to the alternative equation in UG-
101(m)(2)(a)?
Reply: No. See UG-101(j)(2) and UG-101(j)(3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-4(b) and UG-25(f)
File: BC93-716
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-25(f) in Section VIII, Division 1, is it

permissible to introduce a bevel at the lower end of the pipe to increase flow, if the lowest point of
beveled end meets the 1/4 in. maximum distance?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1991 Addenda); U-2(g) and UG-29(b)
File: BC92-219
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide rules for the design of a stiffener ring around the
inside circumference of a cylinder when the stiffener is interrupted by a nozzle opening?
Reply: No, see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Appendix W, Table W-3, Note
27
File: BC93-446
Question(1): A parts manufacturer orders plate from a material manufacturer in the as-rolled condition.
Normalizing of the plate is a customer requirement. The plate is received with the "G" marking, as
permitted by SA-20. The parts manufacturer hot forms the plate into a cylinder at the normalization
temperature, observing the required cooling time and rate. Once cooled the longitudinal scam is welded
and the cylinder is inspected and Part stamped. Are there additional marking and certification
requirements for the plate under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-85 and UG-93(b).
Question (2): Is the normalizing required to be documented on a Manufacturer’s Partial Data Report
Form?
Reply (2): No, see UG-85 and UG-93(b).
Question (3): If the plate had been rolled, welded, and then normalized, would the time and
temperature data be required to be recorded on the Manufacturer's Partial Data Report Form?
Reply (3): No, see Reply (2).
File: BC93-501A
Question: May an assembler for Section VIII, Division 1 pressure relief valves, prior to assembly in
a new valve, coat or contract to have coated a valve spring with a specified/required corrosion resistant
coating?
Reply: No, unless approval is obtained from the original safety valve manufacturer for the
specific coating and method of application.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-20(f) and Fig. UCS-66
File: BC94-044
Question: May pressure vessel materials be exempted from impact testing if all of the requirements
of UG-20(f) in Section VIII, Division 1 are met, even though impact testing would be required under the
provisions of Fig. UCS-66?
Reply: Yes.
20
File: BC94-036
Question: May data entered on Manufacturer's Data Report Form U-1 on lines covered by Note 20
of Table W-3 in Section VIII, Division 1 substitute, if available, Alloy designation/UNS number and
Class/Condition/Temper when Type/Grade is not given for the material in Section II, Part D, Tables IA
and 1B?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda), UG-117(e) and Appendix 10;
Section I, PG-105.4 and A-300; and Section VIII, Division 2 (1992 Edition, 1993
Addenda), AS-204 and Appendix 18
File: BC94-059
Question: May a Code-accepted Quality Control Manual be revised to restructure the format to be
compatible with ISO 9000 as well as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as 1-92-91 and as VIII-2-92-16.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-50, UG-99, and UG-100
File: BC93-765
Question(1): Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-99 in Section VIII, Division 1 when
pressurizing a vessel for hydrostatic testing to use an air line from an air compressor?
Reply (1): Implementation of Code rules is the responsibility of the vessel Manufacturer and shall
be outlined in his Quality Control System.
Question (2): Are there provisions in Section VIII, Division 1 for allowing a combined hydrostatic and
pneumatic test?
Reply (2): Yes, see footnote 33 of UG-100.
Question (3): Would the requirements of UW-50 also apply to a combined hydrostatic and pneumatic
test?
Reply (3): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-15
File: BC93-775
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UW-15 in Section VIII, Division 1 to seal
weld a plate to the exterior of a pressure boundary, where the plate is not attached for strength or
reinforcement, and not verify the pressure integrity of the weld?
Reply: No.
File: BC93-775*
Question: Do the requirements of UW-15 in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to a plate welded to the
exterior of a pressure boundary, when the plate is not attached for strength or reinforcement?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-072
Question (1): A UCS material which is nonexempted from impact testing is welded to a UCS material
which is exempted from impact testing, forming a Category B butt joint and where both materials are of
the same P-Number and Group Number. Under the requirements of UG-84(i)(1) of Section VIII, Division
1, may the vessel (production) impact test plate be made from the same heat of material as the
nonexempted material alone?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May the vessel (production) impact test plate be made from the same heat of material as
the exempted material alone?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): May the vessel (production) impact test plate be made from a combination of both heats
of the materials?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UCS-6(b)(3)
File: BC94-108
Question (1): Do the requirements of UCS-6(b)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to flat covers?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the attachments shown in Fig. UW-16.1 constitute strength welds?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Scope
File: BC94-114
Question (1): Are threaded plugs used in a rectangular air cooled heat exchanger considered to be
within the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would such plugs be required to be constructed of ASME approved material?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May such plugs be used in all pressure ranges?
Reply (3): Yes, provided the plug is adequate for the given pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix 24, 24-1(f)
File: BC94-134
Question: A two piece clamp is used to retain a pressure cover. There are no additional retaining
devices. Is it permissible under the requirements of Appendix 24 in Section VIII, Division 1 to use only
one bolt and nut on each side of the two piece clamp?
Reply: No. See 24-1(f).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (f) and
Appendix 9, Fig. 9-5 Sketch [i-1(b)]
File: BC94-137
Question: May the closure detail shown in Fig. 9-5 sketch [i-1(b)] of Section VIII, Division 1 be
used as a substitute for attaching an intermediate head as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (f)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UW-2(a) and Fig. UW-13.2
File: BC94-180
Question: May any of the attachment details shown in Fig. UW-13.2 of Section VIII, Division 1 be
used for lethal service?
Reply: No, see UW-2(a)(1)(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-115(b) and UG-129(a)
File: BC94-190
Question: May a relief valve manufacturer supply UV Code stamped valves with nameplates that
have the required units given only in metric values?
Reply: Yes, but only under the provisions of Code Case 2116.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UF-31(b)(1)(a) and Appendix 6,
6-4
File: BC94-003
Question: When performing magnetic particle examination as required by UF-31(b)(1)(a) of

Section VIII, Division 1 on vessels fabricated from SA-372 forging material to be quenched and
tempered, shall the acceptance standards for evaluation be that of 6-4 of Appendix 6?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC94-179
Question: Forming operations on heads and shells for a pressure vessel are performed by a
subcontractor who is not a certificate holder. He tack welds temporary attachments (i.e., fit up bars and
lifting/handling lugs) in these operations under the provisions of UW-31(c) in Section VIII, Division 1. Is
it a requirement of the Code that the fit up bars and lugs be identified?
Reply: Yes, but Only as specified in the WPS and PQR in accordance with UW-5.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-1(g)(1)
File: BC94-050
Question: May an evaporator, required to be constructed to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 by
U-1(g)(1), be exempted by the provisions of U-1(c)(8) when it has a maximum allowable working
pressure between 0-14 psig?
Reply: Yes, unless construction in accordance with the Code is required by the user or local
jurisdiction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-16(b)(4) and (c)
File: BC93-718
Question: An air tank is constructed to the minimum required thickness of 3/32, in. as given in UG-
16(b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1; may a formed head with a 6% undertolerance, as described in UG-
16(c), be used in the construction?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Appendix 9, Fig. 9-5 Sketch (d-
1)
File: BC93-764
Question: Is it permissible to attach a closure bar between a jacket and the inner shell of a vessel as
shown in Fig. 9-5 sketch (d-1) of Section VIII, Division 1, except that the closure bar would not have the
second inside fillet weld attaching the bar to the shell?
Reply: No.
File: BC93-777A
Question: What process is required for SA-414 Grades B through G to be assigned to Curve B of
Fig. UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: See General Note (b)(2) of Fig. UCS-66.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66 and UCS-67(d)
File: BC94-073
Question: A hubbed-type weld neck body flange of 1 in., made of SA-350 LF2 material, is butt
welded to a 1 in. thick cylinder, made of SA-516 Grade 70 normalized material. The MDMT is 40° F,
and no exemption to impact testing can be taken under UG-20(f). Is the SA-350 LF2 material exempted
from impact testing under the requirements of Fig. UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: SA-350 LF2 is required to be impact tested in accordance with the material specification.
See also General Note (c), Fig. UG-84.1.
File: BC94-109
Question(1): Is it permissible under the requirements of Appendix 2 in Section VIII, Division 1 to

fabricate a flange by rolling a plate strip and welding the ends, with a full penetration double butt weld, if
the requirements under UCS-79, UCS-56, UCS-57, and 2-2 are met?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to locate a bolt hole in the weld of the flange, as described in Question
(1)?
Reply 2: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-84(h)(2)(b)
File: BC94-110
Question (1): A procedure qualification test plate has been welded using base material in the
normalized condition, and meets the requirements of UG-84. Under the requirements of UG-84(h)(2)(b)
is this PQR also applicable for a vessel production weld joining normalized material to quenched and
tempered material?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is "no," then is it permitted to weld an additional procedure
qualification test plate using quenched and tempered material for testing impact toughness of the heat
affected zone only?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); Use of Joint Factor E in
Appendix 13, 13-4(b)
File: BC93-512
Question: In vessels with square corners constructed as shown in Fig, 13-2(a) of Section VIII,
Division 1 with weld joints at the corners and at the stay plate (if applicable) in which the weld
configuration meets the requirements of the configurations shown in Fig. UW-13.2 for corner joints, and
there are no ligaments or any other weld joints of the types listed in Table UW-12 in the vessel, and the
end plates are designed to meet the requirements of UG-34, may a value of E = 1.0 be used to establish
the allowable stresses for the vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC94-230
Question: Is it permissible to exclude a pilot valve malfunction, the result of adhesion between the
disc and the nozzle, when considering failure of some essential part of the pilot under the requirements of
UG-126(b) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-217
Question: UG-45(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 limits the maximum allowable shear stress for
nozzle necks to 70% of the allowable tensile stress. Does this limitation on shear stress also apply to
design details other than nozzle necks?
Reply: No. Where not specifically addressed in a Code paragraph, shear stress allowables are
defined in Note (b) to Table IA of Section II, Part D.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-1(d)
File: BC94-281
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of U-1(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 to use
formulas from Section VIII, Division 2 and allowable stresses from Section II, Part D (designated for
Division 2 use) when designing a vessel above 3000 psi?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-286
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UCS-6(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 to use
SA-36 plate material in thicknesses over 5/8 in. in the construction of welded covers, similar to that
shown in Fig. UG-34 sketch (g)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UW-3(a)(3) and Fig. UW-13.3
Sketch (a)
File: BC94-287
Question: Is a butt weld made between a tubesheet with a hub and the main shell of a vessel similar
to the one shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch (a) of Section VIII, Division 1, classified under UW-3(a)(3) as a
Category C joint?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC94-288
Question: Under the provisions of UG-90(c)(1), is an Authorized Inspector required to make all
inspections, other than those specifically required of him to certify that the vessel may be stamped with
the U Code Symbol Stamp, before he can certify that a vessel has been designed and constructed in
accordance with the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-84(h)(2)(a)
File: BC94-292
Question: A procedure qualification test plate consisting of P-No. 1 Group No. 1 material welded to
P-No. 1 Group No. 2 material meets the impact toughness criteria for the weld and heat affected zones
under UG-84(h)(2)(a). Can this test plate support the production welding of P-No. I Group No. I to P-
No. 1 Group No. 1, P-No. 1 Group No. 2 to P-No. 1 Group No. 2, and P-No. 1 Group No. 1 to P-No. 1
Group No. 2 materials, assuming all other applicable requirements of the Code have been met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-33(a)(1) and Appendix 1,
Fig. 1-6 Sketch (d)
File: BC94-191
Question: In a spherically-dished cover as shown in Fig. 1-6 Sketch (d) of Section VIII, Division 1
which is under external pressure (pressure on convex side), is it required to increase the design pressure
by 1.67 as given in UG-33(a)(1) before making the required thickness calculation?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 Sketches (b) and
(c)
File: BC94-221
Question: Can Category C welds shown in Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (b) and (c) of Section VIII,
Division 1 be used in lethal service if Code Case 2023 is used along with the requirements of UG-
93(d)(3) and the welded joint is ultrasonically examined in addition to being fully radiographed?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-2(g) and UG-19(b) and (c)
File: BC94-474
Question: May a toriconical head whose knuckle radius is less than 6% but greater than 0% of the
skirt diameter and an angle a equal to or less than 60 deg. be used in Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply: Yes, see U-2(g) and UG-19(b) and (c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-53 and Appendix 13, 13-6
File: BC94-291
Question: May the rules in 13-6 of Appendix 13 or the rules of UG-53 injection VIII, Division 1 be
used to calculate the ligament efficiency of multidiameter holes in cylindrical headers?
File: BC94-564
Question: UG-99(j) requires the hydrostatic test equipment to be examined for tightness prior to the
application of test pressure. Does the Code require the Authorized Inspector to perform the examinations
required by this paragraph?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-056
Question: Is a pressure parts Manufacturer who fully assembles a pressure vessel and ships it to
Manufacturer who will:
(1) complete the pressure vessel by finish machining,
(2) stamp the vessel with the UM Code Symbol Stamp, and
(3) complete and sign the Form U-3
required to supply a Manufacturer's Partial Data Report Form U-2 or U-2A, as provided for in UG-120(c)
Reply: Yes, if parts inspection is required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1.
File: BC94-131
Question: A cylindrical vessel has a continuous spiral half-pipe jacket extending around the vessel
shell, which is attached by welding. May credit be taken, in complying with the requirements under UG-
28 and UG-29 of Section VIII, Division 1, for this arrangement in regards to stiffening for vessels in
vacuum or negative pressure service when calculating the vessel shell thickness?
Reply: Yes, assuming the design satisfies U-2(g) with loadings according to UG-19(a) and UG-
22.
File: BC94-136
Question: May manway covers, used as replacements, made from static castings and not welded, be
exempted from inspection, identification with UG-93(a) or (b), or Partial Data Reports, provided all other
identification and certification required by UG-11(a)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 are met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UCS-66(c) and UCS-68(c)
File: BC94-186
Question: For vessels installed at a fixed location, may both the allowable temperature reduction
determined from Fig. UCS-66.1 and the temperature reduction permitted by UCS-68(c), where applicable,
be applied to the minimum permissible temperature without impact testing as determined from Fig. UCS-
66 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix Y
File: BC94-410
Question: Is Nonmandatory Appendix Y of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to flanges under
external pressure?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-411
Question (1): ERW pipe is supplied to a vessel Manufacturer by a material supplier for the shell of a
pressure vessel. The heads are welded to the shell by an arc welding process. Is the ERW seam
considered a Category A joint?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is yes, does UG-116(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 require
both letters "W' and "RES" to be marked on the nameplate under the Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.3 Sketch (b) and
Appendix AA
File: BC92-326
Question: If the geometry shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch (b) of Section VIII, Division 1 is used for
attaching a shell to a tubesheet, and if Nonmandatory Appendix AA is used to determine the required
tubesheet thickness, may the value of e as defined in Fig. UW-13.3 be less than the required tubesheet
thickness h as defined in Appendix AA?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UCS-25 and Appendix 17
File: BC93-631
Question: Is the minimum corrosion allowance in UCS-25 applicable to a carbon steel Section VIII,
Division 1 Appendix 17 assembly?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC94-496
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-84(j) in Section VIII, Division 1 to

perform a retest without subjecting the test plate to a reheat treatment?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC94-494
Question: May thin heat transfer plates which am welded in pairs, separated by gaskets, and
contained in a pressure retaining frame, be considered standard pressure parts if they meet all of the
requirements of UG-11(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix P
File: BC94-280
Question: Does Appendix P of Section VIII, Division 1 infer that the Code addresses the design life
of a vessel?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-416
Question (1): Are thread connections conforming to standards other than ANSI/ASME B1.20.1, as
specified in UG-43(e) of Section VIII, Division 1, permitted in Code construction?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When other standards, such as ASME B1.1, are used, what are the minimum thread
engagements and minimum plate thickness requirements?
Reply (2): The Code does not address the requirements; see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix 2, Fig. 2-13
File: BC94-591
Question: May a flange with welded bolting lugs attached to the outside of the flange causing the
bolt circle diameter C to be larger than the outside diameter of the shell A still be considered a reverse
flange per Fig. 2-13 of Appendix 2 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No, see U-2(g) and 2-1(e).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix M, M-6
File: BC94-058
Question: When a full area stop valve is installed in pressure relief valve discharge piping, as
permitted in Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix M, M-6, what does the term full area mean?
Reply: It means that the stop valve meets the requirements of UG-135(g), i.e., that it must have
sufficient flow area to assure that any pressure that may exist or develop will not reduce the relieving
capacity of the pressure relieving device below that required to protect the vessel.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-2(h)(3)
File: BC94-106
Question: A pressure vessel is field assembled by a contractor who supplies the Form U-2 Partial
Data Report, and performs the pressure test under the requirements of U-2(h)(3) in Section VIII, Division
1. May the vessel Manufacturer, with the concurrence of his Authorized Inspector, apply the ASME U
Code Symbol Stamp to the nameplate at the manufacturing facility, and then ship the nameplate to the
field for attachment to the vessel by the "field assembly" U-Stamp holder and witnessed by his
Authorized Inspector only?
Reply: Yes, so long as the Manufacturer's Quality Control program contains controls for his
procedure, and the "field assembly" U-Stamp holder and his Authorized Inspector certify the attachment
of the nameplate on the Form U-2 Manufacturer’s Data Report.
File: BC94-414
Question (1): Does the last sentence of UG-99(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, "All loadings that may
exist during this test shall be given consideration," require that the static head that exists in a tower in the
vertical position must be considered when determining the test pressure in the horizontal position?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UG-99 specify in which position a vertical tower must be hydrotested?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Governing Requirements for
Impact Testing Between Material Specification and Construction Code
File: BC94-470
Question: In the 1993 Addenda to Section I1, Part A under SA-649, the requirement in para. 1.2
mandates that the “minimum design temperature shall be 40° F....” If the material is not being used below
40° F, is impact testing required per Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Forewords, Table W3,
Note No. 13, and Table 1-220, Note No. 12
File: BC94-502
Question (1): Are requirements of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, either in present or subsequent
Editions and Addenda, applicable for pressure vessels already constructed and in service?
Reply (1): Requirements for pressure vessels constructed and in service are outside the scope of the
Code. As outlined in the Forewords of the Code, "The Committee's function is to establish rules deemed
necessary for the new construction of pressure vessels......
Question (2): What Edition and Addenda of the Code is to be recorded on the Manufacturer's Data
Report Forms?
Reply (2): The current mandated Edition and Addenda of the Code at the time of contract between
the user and the Manufacturer.
File: BC94-584
Question: Does the term "monitor" in UG-91(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 imply that the
Authorized Inspector perform formal audits at predetermined intervals to verify the Manufacturer's
Quality Control System?
Reply: No, this is but one approach that an Authorized Inspector may employ to satisfy the
requirements of UG-91(b).
File: BC94-587
Question: Do the requirements of UG-116(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 provide for any additional
marking on a nameplate, other than that mandated in UG-116(a) for MDMT, when impact testing is a
Code requirement and the provisions of UG-120(d) have been met?
Reply: No, except for those vessels designed and constructed to the rules of Part ULT which
require the letters ULT below the U Code Symbol Stamp.
Interpretation- VIII-1-95-32 (Void see VIII-1-95-32R page 661)

Subject Section-Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 A
File: BC94-589
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-90(b)(8) in Section VIII, Division 1, must all
defects identified in UW-38 and UF-38, for vessels under construction, including those inherent to the
welding and forging processes and for which methods of repair are specified by the Code, be subjected to
the Authorized Inspectors concurrence prior to making the actual repair?
Reply: Yes
File: BC94-589*
Question: In complying with requirements of UG-90(b)(8) in Section VIII, Division 1, must all
defects identified in UW-38 and UF-38, for vessels under construction, including those inherent to the
welding and forging processes and for which the methods of repair are specified by the Code, be
subjected to the Authorized Inspector's acceptance prior to making the actual repair?
Reply: Yes; however, acceptance by the Authorized Inspector for a defined class of repairs can
be preapproved if described in the Manufacturer's Quality Control manual in accordance with Appendix
10 of Section VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Table UCS-56, P-Nos. 1 and 4
Materials
File: BC88-084
Question (1): Is postweld heat treatment mandatory under Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1
for fillet or fillet plus groove welds that attach tube-to-tubesheets when the tubes are 3/4 in. O.D. and 14
BWG in thickness, and all materials are P-No. 4?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Same as Question (1), except that the tubesheet is a P-No. 1 material and the tubes are a
P-No. 4 material?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1990 Addenda); Lower Limit on MDMT in Part
UCI
File: BC91-573
Question: Are the materials in Part UCI of Section VIII, Division 1 subject to a minimum design
metal temperature lower limit?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda), Table W-3, Note Nos. 31, 41, 43,
46, and 50
File: BC93-524
Question(1): Does Note No. 31 of Table W-3 require the degree of examination to be recorded on the
Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report for seamless heads?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Note No. 43 of Table W-3 require threaded fittings (e.g., couplings, thread-o-lets)
to be designated as a flange type on the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May the nominal pressure rating (such as Class 3000 couplings, etc.) be used instead of
the nominal nozzle thickness in the location showing Note No. 46 on the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data
Report?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): May other than inspection openings specified in Note No. 41 be recorded in the location
showing Note No. 50 on the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (4): Yes.

File: BC93-637
Question: Does a backpressure regulator, used as an adjustable overpressurization control device,

meet the definition of a pressure relief device under UG-126 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UW-40(f)(5)(c), and Tables
UCS-56 and UHA-32
File: BC93-735
Question (1): UW-40(f)(5)(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 states that shell thickness is the controlling
value for postweld heat treatment when attached to a flat head. No mention is made of material. A flat
head is attached to a shell with a joint as shown in Fig. UG-34(g), with the addition of an integral backup
bar. The head is 2 1/2 in. thick and made of SA-516 Grade 70, the shell is 1 1/4 in. thick and made of SA-
240 Grade 304. Is it acceptable to weld the shell to head using a 200° F preheat without performing
PWHT?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): The same conditions apply as in Question (1) except that the shell material is also of SA-
516 Grade 70?
Reply (2): Postweld heat treatment is not a mandatory requirement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix 2, Applicability for
Designing Autoclaves and Hydroclaves
File: BC94-366
Question: Are the rules presented in Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, "Rules for Bolted Flange
Connections with Ring Type Gaskets" applicable for the design of autoclave and hydroclave closures that
consist of full diameter quick opening doors, with a lugged flange on the vessel head and a lugged lock
ring that can rotate to allow (or prevent) opening of the door?
Reply: No, see U-2(g) and UG-35.
File: BC94-567
Question: For UCS-23 material, General Note (b) to Table IA in Section II, Part D allows the shear
stress in restricted members to be 0.8 times the value permitted in the Table. Does Section VIII, Division
1 specify the allowable shear stress in a member that is not restricted?
File: BC94-569
Question: Do the joint efficiencies for Type Nos. 4, 5, and 6 welds, defined in Table UW-12, apply
to other fillet welds?
Reply: No.
File: BC94-576
Question: For welds Type Nos. (4), (5), and (6) as defined in Table UW-12 of Section VIII,
Division 1, should the allowable load on the welds be determined by weld strength calculations?
Reply: No, weld strength calculations are not required for Table UW-12 joints.
File: BC94-577
Question: The Note in UW-15(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 says the 49% factor for fillet welds in
shear is the product of 87.5% times 80% for shear strength times the "joint efficiency factor." Is this "joint
efficiency factor" the same as the joint efficiency factor given in Table UW-12 (0.45 for single fillet
welds)?
Reply: No, the joint efficiencies given in Table UW-12 apply only to the weld types defined in
Table UW-12.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-101(m)(2)(a)
File: BC94-666
Question (1): Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-101(m)(2)(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 to
use the specified minimum tensile strength for Sµr in the second equation for P when the material
specification does not give a range of tensile strengths but specifies a minimum tensile strength only?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it permissible under the provisions of UG-101(m)(2)(a) to use the tensile strength
reported on the certified mill test report, covering the material used in the test, for the value of Sµavg?
Reply (2): No, see UG-101(j).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-I(c)(3) and UF-7
Date Issued: February 6. 1995
File: BC94-669
Question: Is a forged pressure vessel, having an inside diameter greater than 6 in. and an operating
pressure over 200 psi, which is used for corrugating paper machinery exempted from construction by the
requirements of U-I(c)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. See UF-7. Also see footnote (1) of U-1.
File: BC94-671
Question (1): A parts Manufacturer butt welds two flat plates which will be formed into a tank head by
someone else. The formed head is returned to the parts Manufacturer who welds closed the hole in the
center of the head which was needed for the forming process. Is it permissible for the parts Manufacturer
to supply one Partial Data Report Form, to comply with the requirements of UG-116(h) in Section VIII,
Division 1, at the end of the second welding process for the completed head as long as all of the welding
processes are recorded on the Form, and the procedures are covered in the parts Manufacturer's Quality
Control System?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): What type of identification for the plate and finished head is required if the plate material
is 3/16 in. thick or less?
Reply (2): See UG-118.
File: BC94-679
Question (1): If a user specification states that a vessel is to be designed with a corrosion allowance,
may this fact be sufficient verification that the vessel is intended for corrosive service?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May a vessel that has been designed with a corrosion allowance be specified under
Remarks on the Manufacturer's Data Report Form "for noncorrosive service"?
Reply (2): Yes, provided noncorrosive service has been specified by the user.
File: BC94-412
Question (1): For vessel parts for which Partial Data Reports are required in UG-120(c), may "RT-1"
be added to the required stamping?
Reply (1): No. "RT-1" marking only applies to complete vessels.

Question (2): For vessel parts for which Partial Data Reports are required in UG-120(c), are additional
markings "W" and "year built" prohibited?
Reply (2): No, provided all the requirements of the additional marking are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-I(h)
File: BC94-670
Question: Steam is generated in a processing system containing a number of pressure vessels used
in the manufacture of chemical and petroleum products. When the steam generated does not provide all
the steam needed for the operation of the chemical or petroleum process plant, fired auxiliary steam
generation equipment, which is an integral part of the plant, is necessary for the operation of the plant.
May fired auxiliary steam generation equipment that generates steam for the operation of a chemical or
petroleum processing system be constructed to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, satisfying the
requirements of U-1(h)?
Reply: Yes, see footnote 1 of U-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Foreword
File: BC94-672
Question: Does the term "construction" as used in the Foreword of Section VIII, Division 1 include
material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UCS-79(d)
File: BC94-684
Question (1): A cold formed head has to be heat treated to fulfill the requirements of UCS-79(d) in
Section VIII, Division 1. Does the term "heat treated subsequently" mean just after forming and prior to
any other operation?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is no, then will PWHT in accordance with UCS-56 satisfy the requirements
of UCS-79(d) following welding of the head to the vessel?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UW-35(b) and Appendix 6, 6-3
and 6-4
File: BC95-046
Question (1): Is a reduction in thickness due a welding process, e.g., an "outside undercut" that meets
the requirements of UW-35(b)(1) and (2), acceptable under Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Would such an indication be classified as a relevant indication when magnetic particle
examination is required and performed by Appendix 6?
Reply (2): No, this indication would not be considered a relevant indication, until it exceeded the
acceptable requirements of UW-35(b)(1) or (2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-1(e)(1)
File: BC95-047
Question: An aluminum weld neck flange is welded to a nozzle neck of an aluminum vessel,
constructed to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1. May the Manufacturer exclude the weld neck flange
and joining weld from the scope of Division 1, i.e., U-1(e)(1), if they are properly described on the vessel
drawing and the Manufacturer’s Data Report Form?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UW-9(d) and AF-605
File: BC95-049
Question (1): Are there any requirements for heat treatment after forming in Section VIII, Division 2
similar to those of AF-605, for pressure vessels constructed of carbon and low alloy steel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are there any requirements to stagger the longitudinal weld scams in Section VIII,
Division 2 similar to those of UW-9(d) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC93-438
Question: Is evidence required to prove that all requirements of Fig. UCS-66 in Section VIII,
Division 1 are met in order to claim exemption from impact testing?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC93-482
Question: Is it permissible for a Manufacturer of a pressure vessel part consisting of a manway

collar and removable cover to apply a nameplate bearing the ASME Code Symbol Stamp and other
markings required by UG-116(h) of Section VIII, Division 1 to both the manway collar and removable
cover? Both items are identified on the Manufacturer's Partial Data Report Form.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC92-332
Question: Is it permissible for a Manufacturer to use electronic transfer of material certification

data, verifying heat numbers and test values in accordance with purchasing specifications, to comply with
the provisions of 10-6 in Appendix 10 of Section VIII, Division 1 for documentation of Certificates of
Compliance or Material Test Reports?
Reply: Yes, provided this system is addressed in the Certificate Holder's Quality Control
Manual.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); Requirements for Stamping and
Partial Data Report Forms for Assemblies Made to SA-649 Material
File: BC95-156
Question: A forging manufacturer (supplier) provides material in accordance with SA-649 to a

corrugated paper machinery manufacturer (purchaser). This material consists of a roll shell with shrink fit
trunions which are optionally seal welded (SA-649, Sections 1.1 and 4.3) to the shell body/trunnion
interface. The supplier also marks and certifies the material in accordance with referenced SA-788
(general specifications), Sections 16 and 17. Is it permissible for a Certificate Holder to receive this
material from a forging manufacturer (supplier) without a Form U-2A Partial Data Report?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Appendix 1, Fig. 1-6 Sketches
(b), (c), and (d)
File: BC95-042
Question: Can spherical dished covers as shown in Appendix 1, Fig. 1-6 sketches (b), (c), and (d) of
Section VIII, Division 1, which are under external pressure (pressure on the convex side), be treated as
either a torispherical or hemispherical head in UG-33?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC95-050
Question: Does UG-24 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to integrally cast flanges that meet all the
requirements of ANSI B16.5?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); UG-84(i)(3)(a)(2)
File: BC95-157
Question: If welding will be performed during production in the 2G position, will a test plate made
in the 1G position satisfy the requirements of UG-84(i)(3)(a)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC95-158
Question: Are there any additional constraints in Section VIII, Division 1 on a Manufacturer's
choice of a "...coded marking..." as required by UG-77(a), other than that given in UG-77(b)?
Reply: No. Material identification shall be as set forth in a procedure as required by the
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UCS-66(a)(1)(a) and Fig. UCS-
66.3 Sketch (a)
File: BC95-161
Question: Figure UCS-66.3 sketch (a) shows the configuration and parameters for determining the
governing thickness as allowed under UCS-66(a)(1)(a) of Section VIII, Division 1. Is the governing
thickness tgl equal to tB when the butt welded joint uses weld metal deposit buildup to attach a shell to a
head?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC95-167
Question: In meeting the requirements of UCS-57 in Section VIII, Division 1, is it permissible to

perform radiographic examination of carbon and low alloy steel welds prior to performing postweld heat
treatment?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-21, UG-22(b), and UG-
99(b)
File: BC95-172
Question (1): The operating liquid level in a vertical vessel is controlled so that the level can never
exceed half-full. In complying with the requirements of UG-21 in Section VIII, Division 1, is it
permissible to determine the thickness of the bottom head of the vessel for the maximum allowable
working pressure plus the static head due to the operating liquid, even though the vessel is full of liquid at
hydrostatic test?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Shall consideration be given to the effect of the static head during hydrostatic test of the
vertical vessel described in Question (1)?
Reply (2): Yes, see UG-22(b) and UG-99(b).
Question (3): If Reply (2) is yes, shall U-2(g) be used to check the design at hydrostatic test?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC94-067B
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1, UG-78, permit the mechanical removal of defects in
material by other than the material manufacturer?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When the removal of surface imperfections results in the plate thickness being less than
the required minimum thickness, may the plate be built up with weld metal?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If plate purchased to SB-409 for fabrication of a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel is weld
repaired in accordance with UG-78 by the vessel Manufacturer, is re-solution annealing per para. 8.8 of
SB-409 required?
Reply (3): No. The rules of Section VIII, Division 1 apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda)-, Manway Assemblies
File: BC95-067
Question (1): A vessel is to be built and Code Symbol stamped for Internal Pressure and Full Vacuum.
The Manufacturer intends to use an elliptical manway assembly consisting of an elliptical pressed steel
cover, elliptical ring, bolting and clamping bars, all supplied as standard parts by another Manufacturer,
under the provisions of UG-11. If the clamping bars and bolting are subjected to stress induced by the
internal or external pressure, are they considered to be pressure parts?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If Reply (1) is yes, must the clamping bars and bolting be in conformance with UG-4?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May the vessel Manufacturer discard the clamping bars and bolting supplied by the
manway Manufacturer and substitute other materials which conform to UG-4 for these parts if the vessel
Manufacturer can show by calculations or proof test (UG-101) that the design configuration meets all
Code requirements?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (a), and
Table UW-12 Type No. (6) Joint
File: BC95-170
Question: Is it permissible to use a single fillet lap joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (a) of
Section VIII, Division 1 to attach a steel end hub casting to a shell in constructing a shell and tube heat
exchanger, if the requirements of Table UW-12 for Type No. (6) joints are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); UCS-66(a)
File: BC95-233
Question: Shall vacuum stiffener rings attached by welding be considered "attachments which are
essential to the structural integrity of the vessel" under the requirements of UCS-66(a) in Section VIII,
Division 1, and be evaluated for impact test requirements?
Reply: Yes.
Subject- Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketch (8)
File: BC95-234
Question: Is it permitted to extend the face of a flange, e.g., Fig. 2-4 sketch (8) in Appendix 2 of
Section VIII, Division 1, to a distance beyond the specified maximum of c + 1/4 in., provided that the
nozzle to flange overlap dimension is a minimum of 4 times the nozzle thickness and no other limitations
are exceeded?
Reply: No.
File: BC95-173
Question: May small pieces of flat plate, cut from a fully identified and traceable base plate, where
they are not shaped or formed and are being supplied as nonstandard pressure parts, be marked in
accordance with the requirements of UG-11(b) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject; Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); UW-52(b)(1)
File: BC95-218
Question: Under the requirement, of UW-52(b)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, does the term
"increment" mean 50 ft of linear weld or fraction thereof?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC95-312
Question: Are the requirements of 2-9 in Appendix 2 of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to the
design of a split flange which has an angled beating surface on the split flange face mating with an angled
bearing surface on a tubesheet?
Reply: It is the responsibility of the U Code Symbol Stamp holder to decide if the construction is
the same as one for which rules are given in the text. If it is not, U-2(g) applies.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Appendix 2 and Appendix S, S-1
File: BC95-313
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 have mandatory requirements for allowable bolt stress
during the hydrostatic test of bolted flanges designed to Appendix 2?
Reply: No, see Nonmandatory Appendix S.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-I(e)(4) and U-2(a)(4)
File: BC94-118
Question (1): Does U-1(e)(4) in Section VIII, Division 1 exclude from its scope, valves (other than
safety valves), gages, instruments, and fittings for Division 1 pressure vessels which generate steam?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Do the requirements of U-2(a)(4), in considering the need for piping, valves, instruments,
and fittings to perform the functions covered by PG-59 through PG-61 of Section I, mandate strict
conformance to Section I paragraphs?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UG-77(c), and Section II, Part A, SA-20, 13.5
File: BC94-308
Question: May components/parts that are formed or machined from SA plate material by someone
other than the vessel Manufacturer be supplied with an identification code traceable to the original
required marking and test report to identify each piece when there is insufficient space to accurately
transfer the original markings?
Reply: Yes, however, when the vessel Manufacturer's Quality Control System shall provide for
such marking. See UG-77(c) and SA-20, 13.5.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data
Report, Item 7
File: BC94-417
Question (1): Is it required in item 7 of the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report to record an "S" in
the "Type" column under the heading "Category A" for seamless heads?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it required in item 7 of the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report to record the extent
of radiography in the "Full, Spot, None" column under the heading "Category A" for seamless heads?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it required in item 7 of the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report to record the extent
of radiography in the "Full, Spot, None" column under the heading "Category A" for heads fabricated by
welded sections?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is it required in item 7 of the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report to record the joint
efficiency in the "Eff." column under the heading "Category A" for seamless heads?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Is it required in item 7 of the Form U-1 Manufacturer's Data Report to record the joint
efficiency in the "Eff." column under the heading "Category A" for heads fabricated by welded sections?
Reply (5): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); U-I(g)(1)
File: BC94-586
Question: Is it permissible to construct a heat exchanger where one side (i.e., the shell side) is
constructed to the rules of Section I, and the other side (i.e., the tube side) constructed to the rules
Reply: Yes, provided common elements meet the requirements of both Section I and Section
VIII, Division 1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UG-80(a)(1)
File: BC94-111
Question: Do cross section tolerance requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-80 apply to
toroidal pressure vessels?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-125(f)
File: BC94-620
Question (1): In complying with the requirements of UG-125(f) in Section VIII, Division 1, a liquid-
filled pressure vessel bearing the U Code Symbol Stamp is "otherwise protected against overpressure."
For the case of hydraulic expansion when the vessel is isolated and exposed to a heat input, must the
hydrostatic relief device bear the UV Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, does ASME provide the rules for certifying the
capacities of liquid relief devices?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the answer to Question (2) is yes, does ASME have a recommended procedure for
determining the required capacity of a liquid relief device?
Reply (3): No.
28
File: BC94-351
Question: Is it permissible in complying with the requirements of Note 28 to Table W-3 in Section
VIII, Division 1 to record on the Manufacturer's Data Report Form, the minimum required head thickness
including corrosion allowance?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC93-736
Question: May the nameplate as provided for in UG-119(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 be attached
to an insulation jacket permanently attached to a pressure vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC95-310
Question (1): A vessel Manufacturer holding an ASME U Certificate of Authorization conducts or has
conducted design calculations for the pressure vessel, complying with the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1. The vessel is to be hydrostatically tested prior to the application of the ASME U Code Symbol
Stamp. Is the Manufacturer required to conduct design calculations for any loadings resulting from the
hydrostatic test condition?
Reply (1): The ASME U Certificate of Authorization holder is responsible for complying with all
applicable requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, including the requirements in UG-22. The loadings
to be considered shall include those in the list of UG-22. Design formulas, design rules, methods of
analysis, and allowable stresses for many of the loadings are not given in Section VIII, Division 1. As
stated in U-2(g), when rules and design details are not given, the Manufacturer, that will U stamp the
vessel, is responsible for the analysis as well as any other facet of the design and construction of the
vessel.
Question (2): When calculations for additional loadings are conducted, would they be subject to review
and acceptance by the Authorized Inspector if requested?
Reply (2): Yes. The Authorized Inspector has the right to review and examine any items related to
the design and construction of the vessel when the Authorized Inspector requests it.
Subject; Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-38 and Appendix 6
File: BC95-389
Question: Shall indications, such as small pin holes (porosity), that were not detected visually, but
were subsequently detected using magnetic particle examination, still be considered as indications and not
defects, as given in UW-38 of Section VIII, Division 1, when they meet the acceptance criteria of
Appendix 6?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); U-1(h)
File: BC95-390
Question: May a direct fired organic fluid heater, within which no vaporization occurs, be
constructed in accordance with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, see U-1(h).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UCS-66(b)
File: BC95-397
Question: May the reductions permitted by UCS-66(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to
materials whose minimum design temperatures are determined by UG-20(f)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-52(d)(2)
File: BC95-400
Question (1): In complying with the requirements of UW-52(d)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1, must the
two additional spots be taken in the same welded seam?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Would it be permissible to take the two additional spots in other seams within the same
weld increment?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-52(b)(3)
File: BC95-463
Question: Would the requirements of UW-52(b)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 be met if the
location for performing a spot examination is chosen in agreement with the Authorized Inspector prior to
the start of welding when the Authorized Inspector cannot be present after the welding increment is
made?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); U-1(e)(1)(c)
File: BC95-466
Question: A piping subassembly consisting of a standard pipe flange on one end, a closure or valve
on the other end, and piping branch connection(s) in-between is bolted to a flanged opening on a pressure
vessel. U-1(e)(1)(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 states that for external piping, the Code stops at the first
flange. Does Section VIII, Division 1 require that the piping subassembly, including the closure, be
constructed and Code Symbol stamped as part of the pressure vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-16(d)
File: BC95-472
Question: Does UW-16(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit a combination of fillet and partial
penetration single bevel welds, both from the same side of the vessel wall, when all other requirements
are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Table UHA-23
File: BC93-109
Question: Is the manufacture of SA-358 pipe for Section VIII, Division 1 use limited to
Manufacturers who hold the appropriate ASME Certificate of Authorization and Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UW-20(a) and (c)
File: BC94-664
Question: Is it the intent that the tube-to-tubesheet welds that do not meet the requirements of
strength welds in UW-20(a)(1) and UW-20(c) are acceptable when the welds are sized based on
calculated axial loads in the tube-to-tubesheet joint?
Reply: Yes.
Subject:: Section VIII. Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); Installation of Welded
Refractory Material on Pressure Components
File: BC95-204
Question: Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1 that a contractor that welds refractory
anchors and studs to pressure components used in the construction of pressure vessels which are required
to be ASME Code Symbol stamped, by a Manufacturer holding a U Stamp, hold a valid ASME
Certificate of Authorization and U Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply: Yes, unless the work is performed in accordance with UW-26(d)
Interpretation: VIII-1-95.93-676
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1993 Addenda); UG-99(b) and (c)
File: BC95-420
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-99 in Section VIII, Division 1 to reduce
the test pressure as calculated per UG-99(c) to a value lower than that required by UG-99(b) to comply
with a customer’s specification?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UG-36, UG-39, and 13-6
File: BC95-473
Question: May the method of determining the equivalent diameter of multidiameter holes given in
13-6 of Section VIII, Division 1 be used to determine the size of single and multiple multidiameter
openings in flat heads?
Reply: No method is given for determining equivalent diameters for use in flat head calculations
[see U-2(g)].
File: BC94-267
Question: Does a pilot operated valve with a buckling pin pilot meet the requirements of a pilot
operated pressure relief valve as defined in Section VIII, Division 1, UG-126?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1994 Addenda); UW-40(f)
File: BC95-164
Question: May the criteria given in UW-40(f) of Section VIII, Division 1 for determining nominal
thickness also apply for determining base metal thickness when selecting a Welding Procedure
Specification?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition); UG-136(d)(4) and AR-230(d)
File: BC91-445
Question: Are the requirements of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, UG-136(d)(4) and AR-230(d)
that each valve be tested to demonstrate its set pressure met for pilot-operated pressure relief valves, if the
pilot is tested separately to establish the pressure at which the pilot will actuate the main relieving device?
Reply: Yes, provided the Manufacturer's or assembler's procedures include methods to verify
that all components are functional, properly connected, and leak tight.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Butt-Welded Stub Ends
File: BC95-471
Question: May butt-welded end stubs machined from plate be used in Section VIII, Division 1
construction?
Reply: No. see 2-2(d).
File: BC95-474
Question: Is it prohibited under the requirements of UG-118 in Section VIII, Division 1 to include
additional markings outside the required marking arrangement on a vessel nameplate?
Reply: No, but the arrangement of Code required information shall be substantially as shown in
Fig. UG-118 and noting that the U Stamp must be located next to the Manufacturer's name.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-13(b)(2) and Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (a)
File: BC95-480
Question: If a shell is flared to accept a straight flange head as shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketch
(a), do the driving fit requirements of UW-13(b)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); U-I(g)
File: BC95-498B
Question: An unfired steam boiler is designed, manufactured, and field assembled such that the
boiler satisfies the requirements of both ASME Section I and Section VIII, Division 1. May the boiler be
stamped with both the ASME S and U Code Symbols and recorded on the appropriate Manufacturer's
Data Report Forms required by both Section I and Section VIII?
Reply: No
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UCS-67(d)
File: BC96-098
Question: Under the requirements of UCS-67(d) in Section VIII, Division 1. in services with an
MDMT between -20°F and -50°F, welding SA-516 Gr. 70 normalized plate for vessel using a weld
procedure that has been impact tested to -50°F, but where the welding consumables used are not classified
by impact tests at temperatures not warmer than -50°F by the applicable SFA specification, do production
welds require impact testing?
Reply; Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UHA-51
File: BC96-201
Question: For a component fabricated of austenitic stainless steel where the base metal and welds
are exempt from impact testing per UHA-51(d)(1)(a) and UHA-51(e)(2)(a) in Section VIIl Division 1,
and accordingly the WPS does not have to be qualified with impacts per UHA-51(b), is impact testing of
production welds required?
Reply: No, see UG-84(i)(2)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Appendix 28
Date. Issued: June 18, 1996
File: BC96-093
Question (1): In the manufacture of box headers for air-cooled heat exchangers, is it permissible to use
the requirements of Appendix 28 in Section VIII, Division 1, for longitudinal welds as well as end plate
welds?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to use Appendix 28 in Section VIII, Division 1, when both members are
beveled?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Use of Term Butt Weld
File: BC96-104
Question (1): Does the term butt weld as used in UW-11(a)(5) have the same meaning as the term butt
joint as used in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): The terms butt weld and butt joint are the same except for the added dimension of
location associated with the term butt joint (see UW-3).
Question (2): Does the term butt weld as used in UW-11(a)(5) have the same meaning as the term full
penetration weld as used for Figs. UW-16.1 sketches (a), (b), and (c) and Fig. UHT-18,1?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Does the term butt weld as used in UW-11(a)(5) have the same meaning as the term full
penetration weld as used for Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (f-1) through (f-4)?
Reply (3): No.
Interpretation- VIII-1-95-106
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition); One Corporation with Multiple Shop
Certificates
File- BC95-465A
Question: For ASME Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, may one location of a multilocation
organization, maintaining a current Certificate of Authorization, furnish design procedures, specifications,
and other documents to another one of its locations maintaining a current Certificate of Authorization, for
use without further acceptance, marking, and signatures, provided the Manufacturer's Data Report Form
is appropriately signed by the representative at the location performing the work?
Reply: No, see UG-117(b).
Subject : Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); U-1(d)
File: BC96-122
Question: When a vessel Manufacturer uses additional design principles and construction practices
for pressures over 3000 psi as permitted by U-1(d), is it permissible to deviate from using materials and
allowable stress limits designated for Section III, Division 1 construction, and still apply the Code
Symbol Stamp?
Reply: No, only if the vessel complies with all of the requirements of this Division may it be
stamped with the applicable Code Symbol Stamp.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UG-90(c)(1)(m)
Dow Issued: June 28, 1996
File: BC96-099
Question: If a Manufacturer's Quality Control System describes how verification that nameplates
are attached to the proper vessel is accomplished, may the Authorized Inspector accept this as complying
with the requirements of UG-90(c)(1)(m) in Section VIII, Division 1 without physically seeing the
attachment being performed?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC93-669
Question(1): May a vessel or part manufacturer recertify a proprietary alloy under UG-10 of Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply(1): Yes, provided all requirements in UG-10(a)(2) are met.
File: BC95-401
Question(1): Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-29(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 to use an
internal stiffening ring having two or more unsupported shell arcs?
Reply(1): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-20(f)(3)
File: BC96-246
Question(1): A vessel is comprised of a single pressure chamber for which one-half is assigned a
design temperature of 650 F and the other half is assigned a design temperature of 750 F. May the
impact test exemption permitted under UG-20(f)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied for the section
of the vessel at 650 F, provided the other requirements of UG-20(f) are met?
Reply(1): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-34 and UW-16
File: BC96-256
Question(1): Does UW-16 in Section VIII, Division 1 address the minimum requirements for
attachment welds at openings for flat heads under UG-34?
Reply(1): Yes.
File: BC96-276
Question(1): May a visual examination of tack welds as required by UW-31(c) in Section VIII,
Division 1 for those welds to be left in place, be performed by the Certificate Holder's production
personnel, such as welders, if so identified in the Certificate Holder's written Quality Control program?
Reply(1): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-101(l)
File: BC96-215
Question(1): May the MAWP of a vessel be determined using the requirements of UG-101(l) in
Section VIII, Division 1 if the vessel is constructed from a material that does not exhibit a definite yield
point, but does exhibit a gradual elastic-plastic transition such that its yield strength may be determined
by UG-101(j)?
Reply(1): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-25(e), UG-46(a)(4), UG-
46(b), and UG-46(f)(3)
File: BC96-273
Question(1): For a vessel over 36 in. I.D. where providing a manhole is impracticable, may the
required handholds, as given in UG-46(f)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1, be located in the same head if
approved by the authorized inspector?
Reply(1): No. See UG-46(f)(4).

Question(2): Are the provisions of UG-25(e) and UG-46(b) applicable for a vessel in non-corrosive
service?
Reply(2): No. However as required by UG-46(a)(4), the words “for noncorrosive service” shall be
noted on the Manufacturer's Data Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-116, UW-40, UCS-56, and
Appendix 27
File: BC96-129
Question(1): In complying with the requirements of Appendix 27 in Section VIII, Division 1, is it

necessary that the provisions of UCS-56 (i.e., rate of heating/cooling, and minimum thermocouple
quantity and location) be met for a glass-lined (enameled-lined) vessel when thermal heating is performed
only for the purpose of the glass-lining and not for any Code or service requirements, and the vessel is
exempted from impact testing and the maximum thickness is less than or equal to 1 1/2 in.?
Reply(1): No.
Question(2): When any portion of a vessel is subjected to thermal heat treatment for the purpose of, a
glass-lining operation only, under Appendix 27, must the nameplate of the completed vessel be marked
HT when PWHT is not a Code requirement?
Reply(2): No.
File: BC96-130
Question(1): A material to be used for the shell of a vessel has its longitudinal seam (Category A joint)
welded by the material supplier. Is the manufacturer in complying with the provisions of UG-116(b)(1)
in Section VIII, Division 1 required to identify which welding process was used in welding the seam?
Reply(1): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); 13-4(b)
File: BC96-209 (BC96-228)
Question(1): Under the requirements of Appendix 13, 13-4(b), in Section VIII, Division 1, is the
calculated membrane plus bending stress (Sm + Sb) limited to 1.5SE when using formulas (8) and (10) in
13-7?
Reply(1): Yes.
File: BC96-210
Question(1): Do the minimum thickness requirements of UG-45(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 for
nozzle neck apply to the thickness of the hub at the bevel of an ASME/ANSI B16.5 welding neck flange?
Reply(1): Yes.
File: BC96-216
Question(1): May the markings required of UG-119 in Section VIII, Division 1 be lithographed on the
nameplate?
Reply(1): Yes, provided the requirements of UG-119(c)(1) and (2) are met.
File: BC96-217
Question(1): When determining the reinforcement requirements for an opening in a flat bolted cover,
must the gasket seating condition as well as the internal pressure condition be considered in applying the
formula from UG-39(b)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply(1): Yes,
File: BC96-219
Question(1): May a subcontractor perform weld overlay on a pressure part supplied by the vessel
manufacturer under the provisions of UG-11(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply(1): No.
File: BC96-227
Question(1): When a nozzle neck is either threaded or expanded into a vessel shell in accordance with
UG-43(e) or (f) of Section VIII, Division 1, and reinforcement calculations for the opening in the shell or
head are required by UG-36, may credit be taken for excess area in the nozzle A in the calculations in
UG-37?
Reply(1): No.
File: BC96-236
Question(1): Do the provisions UG-36(c)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the internal diameter
of a finished non-perpendicular nozzle?
Reply(1): No.
Question(2): When applying the rules of UG-36(c)(3), is the finished opening of a nonradial nozzle
measured as the chord length of the opening at the midsurface of the thickness?
Reply(2): Yes, see definition for d in UG-37(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-12(b) and UG-43(g)
File: BC96-249
Question(1): A tapped hole meeting the requirements of UG-43(g) in Section VIII, Division 1 has
thread engagement less than 1 1/2ds,. Can the stud that is threaded into the tapped hole be provided with
a threaded portion less than the 1 1/2 diameter length requirement of UG-12(b)?
Reply(1): No. However, the threaded portion of the stud needs to engage the threaded portion of the
tapped hole for a length only as required by UG-43(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition); UG-117(b) and AS-201, One Corporation
With Multiple Shop Locations
File: BC95-465B
Question(1): For ASME Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, is it permissible for a multilocation
organization to have only one ASME Certificate of Authorization and extend it to all its shop locations
provided the operation is adequately described in the Quality Control System (QCS) Manual?
Reply(1): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-117(b) and AS-201
File: BC96-128
Question(1): May a Certificate Holder of a U and/or U2 Code Symbol whose scope includes field
extensions fabricate Code items at a facility owned or leased by the Certificate Holder which is not
identified as the primary location on the Certificate of Authorization?
Reply(1): No, except at an "intermediate point" where the vessel is completed (e.g., shipping dock
or railroad location) prior to shipping, or location of final installation.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-1l7(b) and AS-201
File: BC96-l28*
Question: May an S, H, D, and U2 Code Symbol Stamp Holder whose location includes field
site extensions, fabricate Code items at a location other than that identified on the Certificate of
Authorization or the point of final installation of stamped items?
Reply: No, except at a temporary, intermediate site required for assembly of parts to be installed
at the final, permanent field location.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as VIII-2-95-13R.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); U-1 and UG-11
File: BC95-396
Question(1): Are flanged immersion heater assemblies (electric heater elements which are welded,
pressed, or soldered into a bolted closure) which act as one of the main closures of a pressure vessel
considered to be within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply(1): Yes.
Question(2): Are the heater elements themselves exempted from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1
as proprietary fittings per U-1(e)(4)?
Reply(2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Impact Values for Filler Metals
File: BC96-372
Question(1): A pressure vessel to be constructed to Section VIII, Division 1 has its materials and welds
exempt from impact testing by the provisions of UG-20(f). If the vessel is to be rated for -20 F to
650 F service, must the welding filler materials conform to a specification requiring impact values at -
20 F?
Reply(1): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); U-1(a) and U-1(g)(3)
File: BC96-380
Question(1): May a generator, i.e., heat exchanger, fall under the scope, U-1(a), of Section VIII,
Division 1 if the external heat source is flue gas from an independent combustor, and the vapor (steam)
generated is used internal to the unit?
Reply(1): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-12, UG-23, UCS-10,
UHA-12, AM-100, and AM-600; Use of Rod and Bar Material for Flange Bolting
File: BC96-306
Question(1): Is it permitted in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 to use rod and bar stock, other than that
listed in Section II, Part D, Tables 3 and 4 to fabricate bolts, including swing and T-bolts, for pressure
retaining applications?
Reply(1): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UCS-79(b)
File: BC96-351
Question(1): In complying with the requirements of UCS-79(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, would a
"spinning process" be the sole type of forming operation used to form a head, e.g., torispherically dished
heads?
Reply(1): No.
Interpretation Inadvertently Omitted From Volume 40

File: BC96-353
Question: Does the definition of required thickness tr, for a formed head given in the nomenclature
of UG-37(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply when determining the minimum nozzle neck thickness in
UG-45(b)(1)?
Reply: No, see UG-32.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UW-40(f)(5)(a)
File: BC96-255
Question: In Interpretation VIII-1-92-80, Question (3), is the term "minimum gauge thickness” used
in reference to sheet or strip material that is too thin to be supplied to a nominal plate thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketches (1) and
(m)
File: BC96-258
Question (1): May the inside of the thicker shell section shown in Fig. UW-13.1 sketches (1) and (m) of
Section VIII, Division 1 be contoured to match the head inside radius at the point of attachment and
continue past the tangent line to where the head radius would match the shell inside diameter, such that
below the tangent line the shell thickness becomes less than tr, the required thickness of the shell?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the shell thickness below the tangent line in Question (1) is equal to or greater than the
required shell thickness tr, may the detail proposed in Question (1) be used?
Reply (2): Yes, if the requirements of U-2(g) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Appendix 4, 4-3(f)
File: BC96-277
Question: Is it permissible to use a magnifying glass for measuring the size of rounded indication to
determine their acceptability in comparing with the requirements of 4-3(f) in Appendix 4 of Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII. Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-2(a), UCL-34, and UCL-35
File: BC96-334
Question (1): Are the requirements in UW-2(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 for performing full
radiography and postweld heat treatment on vessels which are to contain lethal substances applicable
regardless of the calculated pressure and thickness for the vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the requirements of UW-2(a) superseded by the provisions of UCL-34 and UCL-35?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-2(a)(1)(c) & Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketch
(7)
File: BC96-341A
Question: Would an integral type flange shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (7) in Section VIII, Division 1 be
acceptable for lethal service if the requirements of UW-2(a)(1)(c) are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (b)
File: BC96-354
Question: Before welding, a corner joint meets the dimensional requirements as shown in sketch (b)
of Fig. UW-13.2 of Section VIII, Division 1. A sample of this joint was welded and a cross section of the
joint indicates that the peripheral edge of the plate tp was completely fused within the joint, but the overall
cross section of the joint still meets sketch (b) of Fig. UW-13.2. Does this comer joint, as described, meet
the requirements of sketch (b) of Fig. UW-13.2?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-11(a)(2) and UG-44
File: BC96-373
Question: Is it permissible under Section VIII, Division 1 for a vessel manufacturer to use a long
weld neck flange with designated pressure-temperature ratings per a manufacturer’s standard without
doing any additional calculations per code rules?
Reply: Yes, see footnote 6 of UG-11.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketch (la)
File: BC96-379
Question: The note under Fig. 2-4 sketch (la) indicates "this weld may be machined to a comer radius to suit
standard lap joint flanges." There is a minimum dimension of 0.7c for the fillet weld in this Figure. Is it intended that the
0.7c dimension apply prior to the machining of the comer radius indicated in the note, that is, where this machining will
cause the dimension of the fillet weld to be less than the 0.7c?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UCS-79(d)
File: BC96-352
Question: When vessel shell sections, heads, or other pressure boundary parts of carbon or low
alloy steel plate are cold formed by other than the manufacturer of the vessel, may the manufacturer
accept the subcontractor's certification as evidence that the provisions of UCS-79(d) in Section VIII,
Division 1 have been met?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda)-, UG-127(a)(3)(b)(5)
File: BC95-499
Question: Under the requirements of UG-127(a)(3)(b)(5) in Section VIII, Division 1, may a rupture
disk which produces fragments on burst be installed between a vessel and a pressure relief valve if the
resulting fragments interfere with proper functioning of the pressure relief valve?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-90(c)(2), UG-116, and UG-
120
File: BC96-240
Question: It is permissible to UM stamp vessels which are fabricated under a UG-90(c)(2) program,
if the inspection and quality control procedure which oversees the UG-90(c)(2) program also meets the
quality control program which was accepted for the manufacturer's UM activity?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-16(b)(1) and (b)(2)
File: BC96-245
Question: Do the exceptions for minimum thickness of 1/16 in, given in UG-16(b)(1) and (b)(2) of
Section VIII, Division 1 apply to thin-walled process tubular heaters, 1/2 in. in diameter or less, when
they are included within the scope of a U stamped pressure vessel?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC96-376
Question: Tubesheets for tubular reactors are fabricated by welding two plates together; this is due
to the required size of the tubesheets. Drilling the tubeholes affects the weld metal, so that the remaining
weld metal between two tube holes is smaller than the permissible flaw size detected by RT. May
ultrasonic examination be used in lieu of the required radiographic examination given in UW-11(a)(2) of
Section VIII, Division 1 for butt welds in flat tubesheets made of two plates with a thickness greater than
1.5 in. up to a maximum of 14 in.?
Reply: No. See UW-11(a)(7).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-90(c)(2) and Code Case
2046
File: BC96-472
Question: May a manufacturer operating under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2) in Section VIII,
Division 1 pneumatically test vessels solely under the provisions of Code Case 2046 without performing
the NDE required by UW-50 and waiving the hydrostatic test requirements of UG-20(f)(2)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC96-522
Question: A drawing for pressure vessel parts shows three parts to be fabricated. The individual
parts are not identified with specific part numbers on the drawing. In complying with the requirements of
UG-116(h) in Section VIII, Division 1, shall each part to be certified on a U-2A Partial Data Report have
a unique manufacturer's serial number and these numbers be entered on the Data Report?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); Appendix 9, 9-5(c)(4)
File: BC96-478
Question: The shell side of a heat exchanger has a bustle or belt type construction similar to Fig. 9-2
Type 1 in Appendix 9 of Section VIII, Division 1. Are the provisions of 9-5(c)(4) applicable. when
calculating the closure bar thickness when the tubesheets are supported as defined in UW-13(e)(3)?
File: BC96-523
Question: A rolled and welded pressure retaining ring is supplied with a U-2A Partial Data Report
by a parts manufacturer and meets the requirements of UG-11 in Section VIII, Division 1. Machining of
the fabricated ring removes the code required markings supplied by the parts manufacturer. Is it required
that all code required markings be restamped on the part?
Reply: No; however, a mark or marks traceable to the original U-2A Partial Data Report are
required.
File: BC96-526
Question (1): Do the requirements of UW-15(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to an internal repad
which will be provided with a telltale hole through the shell of the vessel and be left open?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the condition stated in Question (1), does the code prohibit such construction?
Reply (2): The Code does not address this type of construction.
File: BC96-527
Question: Is it permissible to use limits of reinforcement per UG-40(b) in Section VIII, Division 1
to determine the amount of contribution a reinforcing pad has to a large opening designed per 1-7(b) of
Appendix 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC96-233
Question: Do the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 require the use of a specific methodology
for determining the mean metal temperatures to be used in design as referenced in UG-20(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UW-2(c) and Appendix 26
File: BC96-525
Question: May an expansion joint, meeting the requirements of Appendix 26 in Section VIII,
Division 1, and attached to weld ends in accordance with Fig. 26-2, be used in an unfired boiler designed
to UW-2(c)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UHA-51(g)
File: BC96-409
Question (1): For a vessel fabricated from 1/2 in. thick austenitic ferritic duplex steel not requiring
impact testing in accordance with UHA-51(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, and otherwise exempted from
impact testing in accordance with UHA-51(g), is impact testing required for the production welds and
heat affected zones?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the vessel in Question (1), is impact testing required for the Welding Procedure
Qualifications?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): For the vessel in Question (1), are the requirements of UW-2(b)(1), (2), (3), and (4)
applicable?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): If a carbon steel flange is welded to a nozzle neck on the vessel in Question (1), and the
flange is exempted from impact testing per UCS-66, is the production weld, heat affected zone, and
Welding Procedure Qualification required to be impact tested?
Reply (4): No.

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-11(a)(5) and (a)(7)
File: BC96-336
Question: In accordance with UW-11(a)(7) of Section VIII, Division 1, may UT be applied to a

nozzle butt welded per Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (f-1) through (f-4) if this weld is the final weld in the
vessel and an interpretable radiograph cannot be obtained?
Reply: Yes; however, the absence of suitable radiographic equipment shall not be justification
for such substitution.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-11(e)
File: BC96-337, BC96-368
Question: Are the requirements of UW-11(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable for welded
joints meeting the provisions of UW-12(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UCS-66 and UCS-67
File: BC97-254
Question (1): If the design of a pressure vessel satisfies the requirements of UCS-66(b)(3) in Section
VIII, Division 1 such that no base material impact tests are required, are WPS and PQR impact tests
required per UCS-67?
Reply (1): No
Question (2): If the design of a pressure vessel satisfies the requirements of UCS-66(b)(3) in Section
VIII, Division 1 such that no base material or WPS impact tests are required, are production impact tests
required?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC96-536
Question: May finned tubes made of aluminum, which have their fins mechanically applied to the
tubes and where no welding is performed on the tubes, be supplied by a shop which does not hold an
ASME certificate of authorization and code symbol stamp to a manufacturer of air cooled heat
exchangers that require code stamping?
Reply: Yes, provided the tubes are made of code acceptable materials and meet all code
requirements.
File: BC95-461, BC96-533
Question: May multiple openings in flat heads be exempted from the requirements of UG-39(b)(2)
in Section VIII, Division 1 if they meet the provisions of UG-36(c)(3) including the spacing requirements
of UG-36(c)(3)(d) and do not exceed one-fourth the head diameter?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-34(c)(1) and (c)(2) and UG-
36(c)(3)(a)
File: BC96-105
Question: Are minimum thickness calculations per UG-34(c)(2) in Section VIII, Division 1 required
if a circular blind flange used as an unstayed flat head, otherwise conforming to the requirements of UG-
34(c)(1), has a nozzle installed in the center using full penetration welds meeting the requirements of UG-
39(a) and the nozzle opening size is permitted in the flange standard referenced in UG-34(c)(1)?
Reply: No.
File: BC96-475
Question: For the case shown in Fig. UG-33.1 sketch (b), Section VIII, Division 1, is it required to
use the cone outer surface diameter DL at the center of the attachment of the stiffener to the, cone when
using the equations in UG-29(a) to calculate the required moment of inertia of the stiffening ring cross
section Is, and the required moment of inertia of the combined stiffener-cone cross section I`s,?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC96-257
Question: In determining tr (required thickness) for nozzle walls for use in the Ratio in Fig. UCS-
66.1 of Section VIII, Division 1, must the nomenclature and notes of this Figure be used rather than the
value from UG-45?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-125(e) and (g)
File: BC96-259
Question (1): Does the note in UG-125(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 permit the use of automated
controls, designed in a fail-safe mode, as an alternative mechanical relief devices?
Reply (1): No, however see Code Case 2211.
Question (2): It is permissible to use a rupture disk(s) as a primary relief device?
Reply (2): Yes, see UG-125(e),
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UW-2(a)(1)(c) and (a)(1)(c)(4)
File: BC96-341b
Question: If a shell of a heat exchanger is formed from rolled plate to a nonstandard size, and a lap
joint stub is attached in accordance with UW-2(a)(1)(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, must the stub end still
conform dimensionally to the requirements of ANSI B16.9 as stated in UW-2(a)(1)(c)(4)?
Reply: No; however the construction must meet all of the requirements of this Division.
File: BC97-262
Question (1): In complying with the requirements of UG-36 and UG-45 in Section VIII, Division 1,
may elliptical or obround shaped nozzle necks be used in the construction of a pressure vessel?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are such nozzle necks described in Question (1) permitted on vessels designed for full
vacuum?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Shall UG-2(g) be used for determining the required neck thickness for elliptical or
obround nozzles designed for internal or external pressure, since rules are not explicitly provided in
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); NDE Requirements for PWHT
Vessels
File: BC97-263
Question: For a vessel in which postweld heat treatment is a requirement, is it mandatory that all
radiographic examination required by UW-11 of Section VIII, Division 1 be performed after the final
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I; UW-11 and UCS-57

File: BC03-268*
radiographic examination required by UW-11 of Section VIII, Division 1 be performed after the postweld
heat treatment?
Reply: No, except that UHA-33(b) and UHA-33(c) require radiographic examination after
PWHT.
File: BC97-274
Question: Are the requirements of UCS-66(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable for welding
neck/socket welding-type flanges under B16.5 when the wall thickness of the attached pipe is greater than
standard wall?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC97-275
Question: In complying with the requirements of UW-40(c) in Section VIII, Division 1, should
thermocouples be physically attached to the vessels or vessel parts so as to obtain the true temperature
readings, whether or not a single component/vessel or many are heat treated in a furnace charge?
Reply: Yes, see UCS-56(d)(3).
File: BC97-283
Question: In the nomenclature of UG-34(b) in Section VIII, Division 1, t, is defined as "required

thickness of seamless shell, for pressure, in." When using ERW pipe for shell, may tr be calculated based
upon the stress values for seamless pipe?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UCS-66(c) and UCS-68(c)
File: BC96-378
Question: May the additional 30°F reduction in Charpy impact testing exemption temperature
requirement of UCS-68(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to the provision of UCS-66(c), .which
allows ANSI B16.5 flanges exemption from Charpy impact requirements when the MDMT is no colder
than -20°F?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UCS-66(a)(1)(b) and Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4
Sketch (3)
File: BC96-342
Question: A vessel has a carbon steel cylinder which is welded by two circumferential welds, as per
Fig. 2-4 sketch (3) in Section VIII, Division 1, to a custom forged carbon steel slip-on flange with a hub.
Is the governing thickness tg for impact test exemption at these fillet weld joints the thinner of the nozzle
wall thickness and the flange thickness?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UW-52(c)(3)
File: BC96-477
Question (1): Does UW-52(c)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 require rounded indications that are
aligned to be evaluated regarding whether the alignment and spacing is characteristic of cracks or zones
of incomplete fusion or penetration?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Should rounded indications be evaluated under the rules of both UW-52(c)(2) and UW-
52(c)(3)?
Reply (2): No, they should be evaluated under the rules of UW-52(c)(3).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); U-1(g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3)
File: BC98-088
Question: Must a pressure vessel satisfy the description of all three categories as described in U-
1(g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 in order to meet the requirements for exclusion from
the "unfired steam boiler" classification?
Reply: No.
File: BC97-440
Question: If indications or reflections produce a response greater than 50% of the reference level,
shall the indications or reflections be recorded regardless of their origin?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-125, UG-135, and
Appendix M
File: BC97-443
Question: Is it permissible to have a remotely located pressure relief device which has multiple
isolation valves (that are positively controlled by being locked open) and an orifice (which is part of a
flow element) between the relief device and the Code vessel it protects?
Reply: No.
File: BC97-517
Question: If a 1 in. schedule 40 SA-106 Grade B nozzle neck meets the requirements of UG-
45(b)(4) and is exempt from reinforcement calculations by UG-36(c)(3)(a) and UW-15(b), is it also
exempt from calculations for required thickness due to internal pressure?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(h)
File: BC97-444
Question (1): A vessel is vacuum jacketed at full vacuum. The operating pressure in the vessel is less
than 15 psig. Is the vessel outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): U-1(c)(2)(h) states vessels are outside the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 if the internal
or external operating pressure does not exceed 15 psi. Is this provision based on "gage pressure" or
"differential pressure"?
Reply (2): This provision is based on differential pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4 Sketch (6)
File: BC97-512
Question: May the tapered hub length h as shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (6) of Section VIII, Division 1
include the flange weld when this weld is part of the hub slope?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC97-514
Question: For flat bolted covers, is the term "head diameter" as used in UG-39 of Section VIII,
Division 1 the same as the term d as defined in UG-34(b)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC97-519
Question: May real time radioscopic examination be used to satisfy the requirements of UW-52 for
spot examination of welded joints?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); Fig. UW-16.1
File: BC97-522
Question: May the attachment details shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (a) or (c) be used on a vessel
intended for use in lethal service?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1974 Edition and Earlier); U-I
File: BC98-115
Question: Was it permissible to furnish a Code stamped vessel with nozzle openings, but without
permanent covers?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); Use of SA-553 Type I
Plate Material
File: BC97-317
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 that plate produced to SA-553, Type I
may be used for design temperatures below -275°F?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); Fig. UW-13,2 Sketch (d) and Appendix 2, 2-1(e)
File: BC97-508A
Question (1): Is it prohibited by Section VIII, Division 1 to use Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) for the flange-
to-shell attachment of a reverse flange?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is no, shall U-2(g) be used in the design of a reverse flange
using Fig. UW-13.2 sketch (d) for the flange-to-shell attachment of a reverse flange?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UG-99(b); Appendix 22,
22-3(a); and Appendix W, Form U-1 (line 11) and Form U-1A (line 9)
File: BC98-062
Question: A pressure vessel is constructed to the requirements of Appendix 22 in Section VIII,

Division 1. Is it permissible when determining the value for test pressure to be entered on lines 11 and 9
of Data Report Forms U-1 and U-1A, respectively, to calculate that value based on design pressure
calculations permitted under UG-99(b), where the allowable stress is calculated from the requirements
given in 22-3(a) of Appendix 22?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1995 Addenda); UG-44(a) and (i)
File: BC96-534
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, must corrosion allowance, if specified, be considered when
providing flanges and flanged fittings per UG-44(a) and UG-44(i)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UW-16(f)(3)(a)(2)
File: BC97-267
Question: In Section VIII, Division 1, does the limit given in UW-16(f)(3)(a)(2) apply to the
maximum chord dimension created by the nonradial fitting?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-77(a)
File: BC97-405
Question: A subcontractor cut and formed SA-240 Type 304 coil material into completed parts and
transferred only the heat number. A review of the CMTR shows the chemical and mechanical properties
of each piece is in compliance with the material specifications. Is the heat number sufficient as
identification marking for pressure retaining components to meet the requirements of UG-77(a) in Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, if the control method to identify the material from the heat number is described in
the Quality Control Manual.
File: BC98-174
Question (1): Are the equations for rectangular bolted covers in UG-34 of Section VIII, Division 1
based on uniform support by bolts or studs?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is the responsibility of the Manufacturer/Designer to determine if uneven or asymmetric
bolting patterns provide uniform support in the design of rectangular belted covers?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Shall U-2(g) be used in the design of rectangular bolted covers that are not supported
uniformly?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Appendix 24
Date issued: July 20, 1998
File: BC98-177
Question: Is Appendix 24 in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable for the design of a clamp
connection which is similar in geometry to those described in Appendix 24, but which employs a gasket
design that is self-energized or has a low seating load feature?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-16(c)
File: BC98-180
Question: Do the undertolerance provisions of UG-16(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to plate,
sheets, or strip materials when they are formed to make a cylinder and welded using the ERW process?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); Figs. UW-13.3 Sketch (a) and
AA-1.1 Sketch (b)
File: BC98-225
Question: A heat exchanger uses butt welded hubs for the attachment of the tubesheet to the shell
and channel sections similar to that shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch (a) in Section VIII, Division 1. Does
this type of configuration meet the integral type of tubesheet arrangement as shown in Fig. AA-1.1 sketch
(b) of Appendix AA?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1995 Edition. 1997 Addenda); UG-90(c)(1) (VIII-1) and
AG-303 (VIII-2)
File: BC98-229
Question (1): Is it mandatory that the Authorized Inspector sign off for each of the operations that he is
responsible to witness by subparagraphs UG-90(c)(1) and AG-303 in Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2,
respectively?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does the signing of the Manufacturer's Data Report by the Authorized Inspector signify
that he has witnessed and verified all operations listed in the UG-90(c)(1) and AG-303 of Section VIII,
Divisions 1 and 2, respectively?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UG-90(c)(1)(1)
File: BC98-241
Question: In meeting the requirements of UG-90(c)(1)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, would it be

permissible for an Authorized Inspector to make the final internal inspection of a vessel prior to the
completion of the internal fabrication of such vessel as long as conditions permit entry into the vessel
prior to final closure?
Reply: No. See UG-97.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UW-52(b)(2)
File: BC98-246
Question: A weld joint accepted by spot radiography under the rules of UW-52 in Section VIII,
Division 1 develops a pinhole leak during the hydrostatic pressure test. The leak is repaired, and the
vessel is subjected to a repeat of the hydro test for final acceptance. Prior to repeating the pressure test, is
it required to perform spot radiography to determine acceptability of the repair?
Reply: No.
File: BC98-176
Question: A vessel having dished beads butt welded to a cylindrical shell is to be designed for
external pressure. The dished heads meet the minimum thickness requirements of UG-33 in Section VIII,
Division 1. Must the thickness of the dished heads also meet the required thickness of the mating
cylindrical shell?
Reply: No, but any skirt supplied with the head shall meet the requirements of UG-33(i).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UCS-66(c)
File: BC98-286
Question: May ferritic steel long weld neck flanges, including a barrel whose outside diameter does
not exceed that limited by nut relief, that comply with the design and rating requirements of ASME B
16.5 be used at a design metal temperature no colder than -20 F without impact testing?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC98-227
Question: Does the phrase "in addition to the requirements of (h) above," at the beginning of UG-
84(i)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, only mean that a properly qualified welding procedure with impact
tests of the weld and HAZ is required to be used for the fabrication of the vessel and the vessel
(production) impact test plates?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition); Code Case 2235
File: BC98-327
Question: Is it permissible to use the Ultrasonic Time-of-Flight-Diffraction (TOFD) Technique
when implementing Code Case 2235?
Reply: Yes.
Subject Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UG-133(c)
File: BC97-266
Question: UG-133(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 allows treating several vessels connected together
as a single unit in determining relieving capacity of pressure safety devices to be furnished. Is it
permissible to treat more than one vessel as a single unit for determining the relieving capacity if there are
intervening block valves that comply with the requirements and restrictions given in Nonmandatory
Appendix M, M-5(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Appendix M, M-7(a)
File: BC98-178
Question: When calculating the inlet pressure losses to a safety valve per Appendix M, M-7(a) of
Section VIII, Division 1, for a combination of a safety valve and rupture disk, shall the losses due to the
rupture disk be included in the pipeline calculation?
Reply: Yes. See UG-135(b)(1).

File: BC98-242
Question (1): Are the requirements of UG-77 in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to pipe and tube
material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the Manufacturer required to ensure traceability of pipe material to all the original
product marking requirements including the heat number and manufacturer's name or brand?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Requirement for Performing
Hydro Test After Welding End Closures
File: BC98-245
Question: Seamless, forged pressure vessels are constructed in accordance with Part UF and
Appendix 22 of Section VIII, Division 1. Threaded end closure plugs are not welded to the vessel prior to
performing the required hydrostatic test. The end closure plugs are seal welded to the vessel after the
initial hydro. Is it required to conduct a second hydrostatic test, witnessed by the Al, after the seal welding
is completed?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UW-14(d)
File: BC98-293
Question: Is a Category A, B, or C welded joint required to meet the radiographic requirements of

UW-51 as stipulated in UW-14(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 if a single opening that meets the
requirements of UG-36(c)(3) and UG-37 is to be placed closer than "2 in. from the edge of the weld joint
for material 1 1/2 in. thick or less?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-11(a)(1)
File: BC98-296
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-11(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1, may
pressure parts that are made to order by a parts Manufacturer, and which are described in his literature
with the pressure-temperature ratings to be marked on the parts, be designated as standard pressure parts
complying with a Manufacturer's standard?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, (1998 Edition); Use of SA-105 for Flat Covers
File: BC98-333
Question: A flat, bolted cover is designed in accordance with the rules of UG-34(c)(2). The cover
contains multiple openings which are reinforced in accordance with UG-39(e)(1) or UG-39(e)(2). May
the cover be constructed of SA-105 material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, (1998 Edition); Use of SA-350 Material for Covers
File: BC98-334
Question: May SA-350 material be used in the construction of covers under Section VIII, Division
1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UHA-51(g)
File: BC98-425
Question (1): May vessel components fabricated from materials listed in Table UHA-23 of Section
VIII, Division 1 be individually exempted from impact tests per UHA-51(g) provided impact testing is
not required per UHA-51(c)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, are the requirements of UW-2(b)(1), (2), (3), and (4)
applicable to the exempted vessel component when other components of the vessel are required to be
impact tested?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UG-93(d)(3) and Fig. 24 Sketch
(4a)
File: BC98-288
Question: Is nondestructive examination as required by UG-93(d)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1

required to be performed on a joint detail such as Fig. 2-4 sketch (4a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition): UG-40
File: BC90-470*
Question (1): May the metal for a single nozzle reinforcement be located asymmetrically about the
nozzle center line, within the stated boundaries for the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (1): Yes, provided at least half the required reinforcement be on each side of the center line of
the opening.
Question (2): May the shell nozzle reinforcement area include bolted flange metal from a weld neck
flange welded to the shell and located within the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): May shell nozzle reinforcement area include metal from the straight flange portion of a
dished shell cover welded to shell and within the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40?
Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation Inadvertently Omitted From Volume 44
Interpretation: VII-1-98-52
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UCS-67(a)(2) and AM-
218.2(a)(2)
File: BC98-086
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-67(a)(2) and Division 2, AM-218(a)(2)
that welds be exempt from impact testing, when they are made with welding consumables that are
classified by impact tests in the applicable SFA specification at a temperature not warmer than the
MDMT?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC98-290
Question (1): Section V under T-275 speaks of an “area of interest.” Can this be the same as the
minimum length of 6 in. given in UW-52(c) of section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Spot radiography is performed in accordance with Code rules and meets the acceptance
criteria of UW-52(c) and UW-52(d)(1). If unacceptable indications are found outside the 6 in. minimum
length requirement, is it required to perform two additional spot examinations as specified under UW-
52(d)(2)?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): May areas where unacceptable indications are found outside the 6 in. minimum length
requirement be repaired at the Manufacturer’s discretion?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition); U-1(c)(2) and U-1(c)(2)(e)
File: BC98-336
Question: Is it permissible to use an extruded outlet as a pressure boundary component in a Section

VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition); UG-11(a)(1) and UCS-85(e)
File: BC98-365
Question: Would a pipe such as SA-333 Grade 3 be considered a standard item such as described in
UG-11(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 if it is used as a nozzle in a pressure vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Appendix W, Note 38
File: BC98-367
Question: If all of the materials used in construction of a pressure vessel are exempt from impact
testing per UG-20(f) of Section VIII, Division 1, and UG-20(f) appears in the Remarks section of the U-
1A Data Report, is it necessary to also list an additional paragraph, such as UCS-66(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); U-1(e)(1)(c)
File: BC98-368
Question: In meeting the requirements of U-1(e)(1)(c) in Section VIII, Division 1, are proprietary
bolts supplied with a flange that attaches a non-Code item to a Code nozzle within the Scope of the Code?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); U-16(b)(4)
File: BC98-526
Question: Does the 3/32 in. minimum thickness requirement in UG-16(b)(4) of Section VIII,
Division 1 apply to a pressure vessel in compressed gas service when the gas is not air?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UG-125(g)
File: BC97-398
Question (1): Does UG-125(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 permit the jacket of a vessel not to have a
relief valve directly installed on it, if the only external source of pressure to the jacket is controlled by the
direct spring loaded pressure relief valve set not to exceed the maximum allowable pressure of the jacket
at the operating temperature?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does UG-125(g) permit the jacket of a vessel not to be protected by a relief device, if the
only external source of pressure to the jacket is controlled by the maximum pressure that can be
developed by the centrifugal pump and the maximum pressure does not exceed the MAWP of the jacket
at the operating temperature?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UW-9(e) and Fig. UW-13.1
Sketches (a) and (e)
File: BC97-404
Question: Is it permissible per UW-9(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 to fabricate a manhole or nozzle
neck from two telescoped concentric cylinders connected by a conical section and welded with single
fillet lap welds as shown in Fig UW-13.1 sketch (a) and/or Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (e)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda): UW-3(a)(2)
File: BC98-505
Question: In making a determination of welded joint category under UW-3 of Section VIII,
Division 1, is an attachment weld between a formed head manway cover and a manway neck considered
to be a Category B joint when it is located in a vessel constructed under the rules of Section VIII,
Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); UW-3 and UW-13(e)
File: BC98-510
Question (1): A flat rectangular bolted cover plate is one of the four sides of a pressure vessel of
rectangular cross-section, and is designed by the rules of UG-34(c)(3). One or more nozzles are to be
attached by welding at opening(s) in the cover plate. In making a determination of welded joint category
under UW-3 of Section VIII, Division 1, is the welded joint connecting a nozzle to the cover plate a
Category D weld?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the weld attachment requirements of UW-13(e) applicable for the nozzle weld in
Question (1)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); UW-2(d)(2)
File: BC97-282
Question: Is a vessel that has been lined with refractory or brick or a combination of the two, so that
flame does not impinge on the metal, considered a direct fired vessel under the requirements of UW-
2(d)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC97-280
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-125(g) in Section VIII, Division 1, may a
pilot actuated closure device incorporating a “fail safe” mode be considered sufficiently positive control
in lieu of a pressure relief valve?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Fig. UG-34 Sketch (e)
File: BC99-100
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 specify a minimum overlap between two parts being joined
for the weld detail shown in Fig. UG-34 sketch (e)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Appendices 10 and 18,
Respectively; Document Preparation and Transfer in Multilocation Organizations
File: BC98-307
Question: Do Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 include specific requirements regarding the review,
preparation, and approval of design calculations, specifications, and other documents that are prepared by
parts of a multilocation organization located at addresses other than that shown on the Certificate of
Authorization?
Reply: No. However, the control for such documents shall be included in the certificate
Holder’s quality control manual. (See Appendix 10, 10-5 of Section VIII, Division 1 and Appendix 18,
18-113 of Section VIII, Division 2.)
File: BC99-083
Question: Is it acceptable to use "ferrules," which are flanged tubes used in clamp connections, as
nozzle necks if machined from bar stock (does not comply with Code Case 2148), and purchased as a
Manufacturer's standard pressure part under the requirements of UG-11(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC99-218
Question (1): May pipes, made of carbon and low alloy steel materials and having dimensions per
ASME B36.10, used as pressure vessel nozzle necks or cylindrical shells be designated as standard
pressure parts under the requirements of UG-11(a) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No. Pipe used a nozzle neck in a pressure vessel would not fall under the provisions of
UG-11, miscellaneous pressure parts, but would be procured by the vessel Manufacturer as material and
would be subject to the provisions of UG-93.
Question (2): Does the term "nozzles" as given in UG-11(a) also mean "pipes"?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition; 1998 Addenda); fig. UW-13.3, Note (4)
File: BC99-271
Question: A tubesheet has two butt welded hubs similar to Appendix AA, Fig. AA-2.0 sketch (a).
The hubs meet the details as shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch (a). Are the hub lengths required to meet the
criterion of Note 94) for h in Fig. UW-13.3 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No. The requirement in Note (4) for h is only applicable to sketch (c) of Fig. UW-13.3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-10(a) and SA-372
File: BC98-488
Question: May material meeting the chemistry requirements of SA-372 Gr. G Class 70, except
having additions of elements that exceed the limits of the specification, and otherwise meeting all the
requirements of SA-372 Gr. G Class 70, be certified to SA-372 Gr. G Class 70 per UG-10(a)(2) of
Reply: No, because the presence of additional elements conflicts with the requirements of the
permitted specification.
File: BC98-522
Question: Is it a requirement of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-137(d)(3) that a rupture disk and its
disk holder be provided by the same Manufacturer?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Appendix 2, 2-4(a)(1)
File: BC99-292
Question: Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 provide for a maximum pressure when designing
loose type flanges, as denoted in 2-4(a)(1) of Appendix 2?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-125(c)(2) and (3) and UG-
129
File: BC99-293
Question: Do supplemental pressure relief devices, permitted by UG-125(c)(2) and (3) in Section
VIII, Division 1, require marking, including the application of the Code Symbol Stamp, as outlined in
UG-129?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-16(b)(3) and (4)
File: BC99-269
Question: In the design of a double pipe heat exchanger, the requirements of UG-16(b)(3) and (4) in
Section VIII, Division 1 are not applicable. The inner pipe of the double pipe heat exchanger extends
beyond the flat closure bar to make a flanged connection to piping. The provisions of UG-16(b)(2) are
applied to the inner pipe. Shall the outward extension of the pipe beyond the closure be considered "All
other pressure parts of these exchangers" per UG-16(b)(2)?
Reply: Yes, and they must meet the 1/16 in. (1.6 mm) minimum thickness requirement.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UHA-42
File: BC99-107
Question (1): Is the restriction on columbium given in UHA-42 of Section VIII, Division 1 in addition
to any specified requirements shown in specifications of Section II, Part C?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does the restriction given in Question (1) solely apply to welds that are exposed to the
corrosive action of the contents of the vessel?
Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: VIII-1 -98-76
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Manufacturer’s Data Report
Form
File: BC99-280
Question: When preheat is used in lieu of postweld heat treatment, as permitted by the requirements
of Table UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1, must the preheat conditions be recorded on the
Manufacturer’s Data Report Form?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIIl-1-98-77
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UW-13(e)(3) and Appendix A,
A-2
File: BC99-363
Question: For a fixed tubesheet heat exchanger, should the pressure load as stated in UW-13(e)(3)
of Section VIII, Division 1, include the load due to differential thermal expansion between the shell and
the tubes?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 Sketches (b) and
(c), and Fig. UW-13.3 Sketches (a) and (b)
File: BC99-359
Question (1): A pressure vessel is constructed of plates with corner joint details as shown in Fig. UW-
13.2 sketches (b), (c), or (d) of Section VIII, Division 1. A buttering weld is to be applied to the bevel of
the flat plate before the completed joint is welded. May the buttering weld be considered as part of the b
dimension?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A pressure vessel is constructed with butt welded hubs similar to Fig. UW-13.3 sketches
(a) and (b) of Section VIII, Division 1. Instead of machining the flat plate to obtain the hub, weld metal is
deposited to the plate to achieve the hub dimensions. Do the rules of UW-13(e) and UW-13(f) apply?
Reply (2): There are no specific rules for the detail described; see U-2(g).
File: BC99-358
Question: Do the rules of UG-8(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to a mechanically finned tube
(aluminum fins pressed into spiral grooves cut into the outer diameter of the tube)?
Reply: No.
File: BC99-362
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UCS-6(b)(3) in Section VIII, Division 1 to use
SA-36 and SA-283 material for the side plates of a rectangular pressure vessel when the thickness’ exceed
5/8 in.?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); U-1(e)(2)
File: BC99-373
Question: Are the calculations for lifting of the vessel considered a part of Code, Section VIII,
Division 1, design calculations and required to be made available to the Authorized Inspector?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1996 Addenda); Appendix 1, 1-8(b) and (c)
File: BC98-172a
Question: When using Appendix 1, 1-8(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, if the calculated value of
factor B falls on a horizontal portion of the appropriate material and temperature external pressure curve
such that multiple values of A are possible, what value of A should be used in determining the value of
moment-of-inertia?
Reply: The smallest value of A.
File: BC99-370
Question (1): Is Appendix 1, 1-7(b) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable only when both of the
following conditions exist?:
(a) the vessel diameter is greater than 60 in. I.D.; and
(b) the nozzle diameter exceeds the greater of 40 in. I.D. and 3.4√Rt
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For cases where both conditions in Question (1) exist and the Rn/R ratio exceeds 0.7,
may the rules of U-2(g) be applied in lieu of Appendix 1, 1-7(b) rules?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC99-222
Question: May rounding rules provided in ASTM E 29 and referred by plate general requirements
SA-6 and SA-20, be used when determining compliance with the undertolerance requirements of UG-
16(c) in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.1 Sketch (n) and
UW-33(a).
File: BC99-300
Question: May the center line misalignment of a Category B joint of materials of different
thicknesses, as determined by Fig. UW-13.1 sketch (n) of Section VIII, Division 1, be increased by the
amount of offset allowed for the applicable joint in Table UW-33?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-l-98-86
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-99(b) and (c)
File: BC99-346
Question: Do the requirements of UG-99(b) and (c) in Section VIII, Division 1 preclude the use of a
temperature recorder for the test medium during the performance of the hydrostatic test?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UW-51 and Appendix 12
File: BC99-457
Question: Does the reference to ASNT SNT-TC-1A in UW-51 and Appendix 12 of Section VIII,
Division 1 allow the Manufacturer to use the American Society for Nondestructive Testing Central
Certification Program (ACCP) as an outside agency to certify NDE personnel?
Reply: Yes, provided that it complies with the employer’s written practice.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Use of SA-516M Grade
415
File: BC99-477
Question (1): May SA-516M Grade 415, which is equivalent to SA-516 Grade 60, be used in Code
construction for Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the results are reported in both systems and meet the requirements of both
systems.
Question (2): May SA-516M be specified on the Manufacturer’s Data Report Forms?
Reply (2): The Data Reports should report SA-516 Grade 60 followed by SA-516M Grade 415 in
parentheses.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(c) and (c)(2)(d)
File: BC99-479
Question: A hydraulic manifold is used to house valve components. Its primary function is to
control the movement and pressure of hydraulic fluid. May the manifold be considered outside the Scope
of Section VIII, Division 1 by the requirements of U-1(c)(2)(c) and (d)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Appendix M, M-5(a) and (b)
File: BC99-447
Question (1): Does the M-5(b) wording in Section VIII, Division 1 “the pressure originates from an
outside source exclusively” mean that the only source of potential overpressure is from a fluid contained
or generated external to the vessel and connected to the vessel with piping?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When fire exposure is a consideration in the determination of required pressure relief
capacities, is such consideration covered under the provisions of M-5(a)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): One of the provisos in M-5(a) for permitting a stop valve between a vessel and its
pressure-relieving device is “for inspection and repair purposes only.” Is inspection and repair of the
pressure-relieving device the fundamental consideration driving this proviso?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Does M-5(a) permit an intervening stop valve between two vessels protected by a
common pressure-relieving device for conditions, such as fire exposure or heat exchanger tube failure, if
the stop valve is locked open and appropriate administrative procedures are in place? Both vessels are
considered likely to be exposed to the same fire event.
Reply (4): An intervening stop valve between two vessels is not covered under the provisions of M-
5(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); Appendix 27, UW-2(a), and
UCS-56
File: BC99-478
Question: All P-No. 1 materials are used to construct a Type 2 jacketed glass-lined vessel under
Appendix 27 of Section VIII, Division 1. The internal chamber will contain a lethal substance and has
successfully passed examination in accordance with UW-11(a) and UW-51. The internal chamber will be
subjected to multiple temperature cycles in accordance with 27-4(a)(3) for completion of the glassing
operation. May these multiple elevated temperature cycles be substituted for the heat treatment and
documentation requirements of UW-2(a) and UCS-56?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-90(b)(6) and
AI101(b)(6)
File: BC99-496
estion: Question: Does the application of the requirements of UG-90(b)(6) and AI-101(b)(6) in Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, and their referenced paragraphs require a Certificate of Authorization Holder to
acquire the Authorized Inspector’s concurrence prior to using what is known as a “preliminary release” of
material to fabrication, when there are problems with the material supplier’s documentation or markings?
Reply: No. However, “preliminary releases” are at the Manufacturer’s risk, since even
concurrence by the Inspector does not bind him to final acceptance and certification of the completed
vessel if the problems are not fully resolved.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UCS-66(b) and Fig. UCS-66.1
File: BC99-565
Question: When performing an impact test exemption/MDMT review of a backing strip to be left in
place on a circumferential joint, may the longitudinal stress at the joint be used in the Alternative Ratio in
Fig. UCS-66.1 of Section VIII, Division 1 for figuring the coincident ratio per UCS-66(b)?
Reply: No.
bject: Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-116(j)(1)
File: BC99-574
Question: May the required markings of UG-116(j)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to one
nameplate for a combination unit consisting of multiple detachable chambers that have the same pressure
and temperature rating?
Reply: Yes, so long as each detachable chamber is marked so as to identify it positively with the
combined unit.
File: BC98-230
Question (1): An ASME B16.5 or ASME B16.47 raised face blind flange (or a blind flange machined
to the dimensional requirements of B 16.5 or B 16.47) has its center portion drilled with an array of holes
to accept immersion heater elements that are attached by welding or brazing. Is it acceptable for Section
VIII, Division 1 construction to use the B16.5 or B16.47 pressure-temperature ratings of these standards
without performing any additional design calculations as allowed by UG-44?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is no, what additional requirements apply?
Reply (2): The design of bolted circular flat heads is covered by paragraph UG-34(c)(2), formula
(2). When openings that do not satisfy the provisions of UG-39(a) are present in flat heads, the
reinforcement requirements of UG-39 must be satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); U-2(h)
File: BC98-292
Question: May a Manufacturer’s Data Report Form U-1A be used for certification of a vessel
totally fabricated at a field site controlled by the ASME Certificate Holder with an ASME Certificate of
Authorization which includes field sites?
Reply: No. The Manufacturer’s Data Report Form U-1A as indicated in the title is only used “…
For Single Chamber, Completely Shop-Fabricated Vessels….”
File: BC99-522
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, UW-2(c) permit the use of applicable exemptions in Table
UCS-56 for the appropriate materials when all the restrictions for the exemptions are complied with?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UHA-51(g)
File: BC99-596
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, UHA-51(g), exempt from impact testing all base metal,
weld metal, and heat affected zones (HAZ) for vessels using materials listed in Table UHA-23 designed
with a coincident ratio of less than 0.35 regardless of the MDMT, unless testing is otherwise required per
UHA-51(c)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC99-597
Question: Do the requirements of UCS-68(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to tube-to-tubesheet

welds?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-84, UHA-5l, UHA-5l(d)(3),
and UHA-51(e)(3)
File: BC99-598
Question (1): Are impact tests required on austenitic ferritic duplex steels when the MDMT is +32°F or
colder, and the thickness limit of UHA-51 (d)(3)(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 is exceeded?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When standard pressure parts, as outlined in UG-11, made from austenitic ferritic duplex
steels are within the pressure temperature ratings of its standard, is it still required to perform impact
testing in accordance with UG-84 and UHA-51?
Reply (2): Yes, when the MDMT is colder than -20°F, or the thickness exceeds the limit of UHA-
51(d)(3)(a).
Question (3): Does the exemption given in UHA-51(d)(3) apply to “rolled plate” as used for shells and
heads?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Is the value of “energy absorbed,” as permitted by SA-370, an acceptable value when
assessing the notch ductility in accordance with the requirements of UHA-51?
Reply (4): No.
File: BC99-609
Question: Would it be acceptable under the requirements of Appendix 18, 18-1 in Section VIII,
Division 1, for a vessel Manufacturer to apply the adhesive to the back of a metal nameplate?
Reply: Yes, if the vessel Manufacturer is also the nameplate manufacturer.
File: BC99-599
Question: A Manufacturer constructs plate-type heat exchangers. When media passes through the
exchanger, it is isolated from the frame plate (vessel wall) which has studded flanged connections. There
is no direct pressure or contact from the media at the location of the studs. Are the requirements of UG-
43(d) in Section VIII, Division 1, which specify that drilled holes shall not penetrate within one-fourth of
the wall thickness, applicable for the case described?
Reply: No.
File: BC99-611
Question (1): For the attachment of stiffening rings, Section VIII, Division 1, UG-30(a) states that “the
ring shall be essentially in contact with the shell.” When continuous stiffening rings are attached by fillet
welding them to conical or cylindrical shells in accordance with UG-30, may a gap exist in local areas
between the stiffening rings and the surface of the conical or cylindrical shells?
Reply (I): Yes.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is yes, what is the maximum allowed gap and the maximum
allowed length over which the gap exists?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Division 1 does not specify dimensional limits for the gap between
stiffening rings and conical or cylindrical shells. U-2(g) shall be used.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition, 1997 Addenda); Appendix 1, 1-8(b) and (c)
File: File BC98-175
Question: When calculating the moment of inertia for a stiffening ring at the cone-to-cylinder
junction under external pressure in accordance with the rules of 1-8(b) and (c) of Appendix 1 of Section
VIII, Division 1, is it the intent that U-2(g) shall be used when FL at the large end or Fs at the small end is
a negative value?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC99-456
Question (1): Duplicate or geometric similar parts are referenced in Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)(c) of
Section VIII, Division 1. Are the nominal dimension requirements of diameter, width, height, and length
in UG-10l(d)(1)(c) applicable when a representative panel as defined in Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)(a) is
pressure proof tested per 17-5(a)(1)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Except for the radius, are the nominal dimension requirements of width, height, and
length in UG-101(d)(1)(c) of Section VIII, Division 1, applicable when a representative panel as defined
in Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)(b) is pressure proof tested per 17-5(a)(2)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC99-595
Question: Does the edge alignment of a finished butt welded joint attaching a head (1/2 in.) to a
shell (3/8 in.) need to be within the 1/4t tolerances of UW-33 in Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-19(c) and UNF-58(c)
File: BC99-608
Question: If a dimpled jacketed vessel is constructed in accordance with UW-19(c) of Section VIII,
Division 1, but the base material, used as backing, falls under UNF-58(c), would the welded joint require
liquid penetrant examination?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UCL-51 and Table UCS-56
File: BC00-080
Question (1): A pressure vessel is constructed of P-No. 1 and P-No. 8 materials, and is intended for
lethal service. The vessel is PWHT. After PWHT, but before performing the hydrotest, the interior of the
vessel has a stainless steel lining applied using plug welds. Does Note (2)(c)(5) of Table UCS-56 in
Section VIII, Division 1 permit the liner to be applied after the vessel has been PWHT without the need to
perform any additional heat treatment?
Reply (1): Yes, provided that the preheat requirements are met.
Question (2): Does UCL-51 permit the liner to be repaired by welding to the P-No. 1 base material
after the vessel has been PWHT without the need to perform any additional heat treatment?
Reply (2): Yes, with the acceptance of the Authorized Inspector.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-1l(a)(5)(b)
File: BC00-081
Question: The thickness of a two-piece flanged-and-dished head with a straight flange is calculated
using a joint efficiency of E = 1 for the Category A weld. Calculation permits an E = 0.70 to be used for
the thickness of the straight flange, when the flange is calculated as a cylindrical shell. The shell of the
vessel is calculated using an E = 0.70 for the Category A and B welds. Is the spot radiography
requirement of UW-11(a)(5)(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 required on the circumferential weld
connecting the head to the shell when per UW-11(a)(5), the design of the straight flange is not “based on
a joint efficiency permitted by UW-12(a)”?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-40(c) and UCS-56(d)(3)
File: BC00-082
Question: In complying with the requirements of UW-40(c) and UCS-56(d)(3) in Section VIII,
Division 1, is it necessary to have thermocouples attached to both the inside and outside surfaces of a
vessel during postweld heat treatment?
Reply: No.
File: BC00-083
Question (1): For a cylindrical shell containing an intermediate head, conforming to Fig. UW-13.1
sketch (f), may the intermediate head be treated as a “line of support” as described for term L in UG-28?
Reply (1): Yes, provided that the intermediate head is designed for the same external pressure as the
shell.
Question (2): Is the line of support to be taken at the head tangent line, or is an adjustment required
similar to that made to a closing head?
Reply (2): There are no Code requirements for determining this calculation. See U-2(g).
File: BC00-096
Question: For a pressure vessel excluded from the Scope of Section VIII, Division 1 by the
requirement in U-1(c)(2)(h), but that is constructed to the requirements of the Code including the
application of the U Code Symbol Stamp, is it mandatory that such a pressure vessel be protected from
overpressure by a UV or UD Code stamped safety relief device?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-2(a)(1)(d)
File: BC00-100
Question (I): May reinforced pads attached with fillet welds as shown in Fig. UW-16.1 sketches (a-2)
or (h) of Section VIII, Division 1, be used on vessels designed for lethal service per UW-2(a)(1)(d)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the welds attaching pad type reinforcement to the vessel as shown in Fig. UG-40
sketches (a-1) through (a-4), with or without a nozzle neck, classified as part of the Category D joint?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the reply to Question (2) is yes, do the Category D joints shown in Fig. UG-40 sketches
(a-1) through (a-4) meet the requirements of UW-2(a)(1)(d)?
Reply (3): Of the four sketches cited, only sketch (a-2) meets the requirements of UW-2(a)(1)(d).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1992 Edition, 1992 Addenda); UG-84(g)(2)
File: BC93-751
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide rules on the required number or location of heat
affected zone impact test specimens to qualify one or more welding processes or procedures used in one
joint, other than that given in UG-84(g)(2)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-90(b)(6) and UG-93
File: BC99-564
Question: A vessel Manufacturer purchases plate material to a SA specification that meets the
requirements of SA-20 and UG-93. During further processing of the plate by the Manufacturer, is it
required to determine if the plate thickness exceeds the maximum thickness allowed by Table A1.1 of
SA-20?
Reply: No.
File: BC00-l55 [BC00-267]
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 permit the use of stiffeners in the design of unstayed flat
circular heads, bolted covers, or flanges?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of U-2(g) are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-37(a), Use of tr
File: BC00-l56
Question: A nozzle is located in an ellipsoidal head, such that part of the opening or its reinforcing
extends beyond the 80% limit as specified in the definition of tr in UG-37(a) of Section VIII, Division 1.
Shall the required thickness of the ellipsoidal head, as determined by UG-32(d) or Appendix 1, 1-
4(c), be used in determining the required area of reinforcement on each side of the opening for all planes?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC00-157
Question (1): Do the requirements of UG-45 in Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the external portion of
the nozzle neck which is within, as well as beyond, the limits of reinforcement normal to the vessel wall
[per UG-40(c)]?
Reply (1): Yes, except as allowed in UW-13(g).
Question (2): If a portion of a nozzle neck extends inside a vessel wall [term ti defined in UG-
37(a)], do the requirements of UG-45 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the internal portion of
the nozzle neck?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC00-242
Question: In meeting the requirements of UW-2(c) in Section VIII, Division 1, is an unfired steam
boiler required to have full radiography and PWHT, if required for the material used, when the design
pressure exceeds 50 psi, but the design temperature limits the relative steam pressure to below 50 psi?
Reply: Yes, provided the MAWP stamped on the nameplate is greater than 50 psi.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG93(d)(3) and Appendix 2, 2-
13(a)(2)
File: BC00-268
Question: Is nondestructive examination per UG-93(d)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 required when
a reverse flange is welded to a shell per Fig. UW-13.2 sketches (c) or (d) as permitted by Appendix 2, 2-
13(a)(2)?
Reply: Yes.
Volume 48 Interpretations
Revision to Interpretation Published in Previous Volume

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UCS-85(b) and (e)
File: NA
Question: Is pipe, procured in accordance to a specification in Section n for use in nozzles in a Code
vessel, considered a standard pressure part under the provisions of UG-11 and exempted from the
provisions of UG-85 and UCS-85(b) under UCS-85(e)?
Reply: The pipe described in the Question, where used in fabrication of nozzles, would not be covered
under the provisions of UCS-85(e) where reference is made to standard items described in UG-11.
Therefore, this would require test specimens as described in UCS-85(b )?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-16(b) and Fig. UW-16.1
File: BC00-388
Question: For a nozzle made of pipe, may the pipe undertolerance be subtracted from the nominal wall
thickness for the evaluation of tc in Fig. UW -16.1 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC00-393
Question: A vessel is subjected to the hydro test under UG-99. During the test, a leak is detected from the
gasket seat of a permanent flanged joint. In meeting the requirements of UG-99(g) in Section VIII,
Division 1, may the hydro test be accepted if the flanged joint and the vessel as a whole are found to be
completely tight after the pressure is reduced to not less than the test pressure divided by 1.3?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Appendix M, M-5(b)
File: BC00-391
Question: In meeting the requirements of M-5(b) in Appendix M of Section VIII, Division 1, is it

permissible to have a locked or sealed open full-area stop valve between vessels protected by a common
relief device?
Reply: Yes, provided all the other requirements of M-5(b) are satisfied. See Interpretation VIII-1-98-90.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(e)
File: BC00-500
Question (1): May a pressure vessel, which does not contain an upper head but instead bolts directly to a
piping header via a body flange be "U" stamped as a completed vessel.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A pressure vessel employs a bolted removable cover as part of the vessel assembly. The
cover contains no welding, and may or may not be purchased as a standard pressure part. Must this cover
and its bolting be included within the stamping scope of the pressure vessel, and thus satisfy all Code
construction requirements including material, design, testing, and inspection?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): A pressure vessel employs a bolted removable cover as part of the assembly. The cover
contains one or more welded nozzles. Must this cover and its bolting be included within the stamping
scope of the pressure vessel, and thus satisfy all construction requirements including material, design,
testing, and inspection?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): In the manufacture of multiple duplicate pressure vessels employing removable upper
heads, is it permissible to separately pressure test the vessel body and the removable head in satisfying the
requirements of UG-99 or UG-100?
Reply (4): No, both UG-99 and UG-100 require pressure testing of the completed vessel as a whole.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 and Appendix 28
File: BC00-502
Question: For Category C and D corner joints of side plates in a rectangular pressure vessel, like those
shown in Fig. UW-13.2, or permitted by Appendix 28 of Section VIII, Division 1, when volumetric
examination is performed, is there a need to determine a joint efficiency factor in the design of the
components?
Reply: Corner joints like those shown in Fig. UW-13.2 and Appendix 28 are not butt joints. Volumetric
examination is not required for corner joints, but UG-93(d)(4) and material requirements, such as UHA-
34, UNF-58, etc., may require liquid penetrant or magnetic particle examinations. A joint efficiency of
1.0 shall be used for comer joints. Regardless of the extent of examination, the joint efficiencies given in
Table UW-12 are not applicable for corner joints.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UCS-66(g), UCS-67(a)(2), and
UCS-67(d)(2)
File: BC00-503
Question: May production impact tests in accordance with UG-84(i) be waived when the base material is
not exempt from impact testing by UCS-66(g) or Fig. UCS-66 Curve C or D at the MDMT , but the
welding consumables used have been classified by impact tests at a temperature not warmer than the
MDMT by the applicable SFA specification? The MDMT would not be colder than -55°F.
Reply: No, since UCS-66(a)(1) controls.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-2(a) and Code Case 2211
Date Issued: October 23,2000
File: BC00-501
Question (1): Code Case 2211 clearly makes the decision to use system design for overpressure
protection the User's responsibility. In the context of this Code Case, does the term "User" include his
designated agent?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): As stated in the Foreword of the Code, "Code Cases may be used in the construction of
components to be stamped with the ASME Code symbol. .". May a Manufacturer, at his own discretion,
use any valid Code Case to meet the requirements of the Code?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the use of the Codes Case is acceptable to the jurisdiction, and the Code Case
does not preclude otherwise.
Question (3): Do the provisions of Code Case 2211 require that only the user may specify overpressure
protection by system design and reference the Code Case in writing in the purchase specification?
Reply (3): Yes.
File: BC00-564
Question: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-42(a)(2) and UG-42(c) require the use of supplemental rules of
Appendix 1, 1-7(a) and 1-7(c) for multiple openings in cylindrical shells. When reinforcing multiple
openings in formed heads for internal or external pressure per UG-42, does Section VIII, Division 1
require any supplemental reinforcement rules?
Reply: No. Section VIII, Division 1 does provide alternatives for single large openings in formed heads
in UG-36(b)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(e)(1)(a)
File: BC00-596
Question: An inlet nozzle extends into the shell of a pressure vessel and makes a welded connection (tack
weld) to an internal pipe fitting (malleable cast iron elbow). May this internal weld be considered outside
the scope of the Code under U-1(e)(1)(a) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC98-291
Question: May a Section IV HV stamped steam safety valve be used to protect a Section VIII, Division 1
pressure vessel from overpressure?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition. 1997 Addenda); UG-136(b)(3)
File: BC00-047
Question: Are the hydrostatic test requirements of SA-703 for cast materials SA-216, SA-217, SA-351,
and SA-352 pursuant to UG-136(b)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to bodies and bonnets used
in the secondary pressure zone of pressure relief valves bearing either the "V" or "UV" symbol stamp?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-2(d), UG-19(b) and (c), UCI-
16, and UCD-16
File: BC00-131
Question: If there are no applicable Code rules in Section VIII, Division 1 for the design of a vessel or
vessel part, may a finite element analysis be performed in lieu of a proof test?
Reply: Yes, see U-2(g).
File: BC00-679
Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG-126 in Section VIII, Division 1 to have a spring
loaded pressure relief valve reset, from the stamped setting, by anyone other than the valve Manufacturer,
his authorized representative, or an Assembler?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(e)(2) and UW-2(a)
File: BC00-598
Question: Do the requirements in UW-2(a) and UCS-56 for performing PWHT, and the Notes of Table
UCS-56 apply to parts such as bolted covers when only welding on the part consists of the attachment of
nonpressure parts such as lifting lugs?
Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 49 INTERPRETATIONS
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(h) and (i)
File: BC00-664
Question: A cylindrical tank has an inside diameter exceeding 6 in., and an internal and/or external
operating pressure not exceeding 15 psi. The tank is equipped with a half-pipe jacket that has a maximum
inside diameter (cross section diagonal) not exceeding 6 in. The jacket has an internal pressure exceeding
15 psi. Do the provisions of U-l(c)(2)(h) and (i) exempt both pressure chambers of such an assembly from
the scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-135(b)(1), UG-135(f), and
Appendix M, M-8(a)
File: BC00-676
Question (1): When installing a pressure relief device, is it mandatory as a minimum that the discharge
piping be at least the same size as that of the device outlet itself, even if supporting calculations have been
established by or for the user justifying the installation of smaller diameter discharge piping?
Reply (1): No, unless Appendix M, M-8(a) of Section VIII, Division 1 is invoked by the authority
having legal jurisdiction over the installation of the pressure vessel
Question (2): When installing a rupture disk/relief valve combination, with the rupture disk being
installed upstream of the relief valve with a concentric reducer and piping installed at the rupture disk
discharge, is it acceptable if supporting calculations have been established by or for the user justifying the
installation, provided that the reduced piping has an area at least equal to the relief valve inlet, and also
provided that upon bursting that the rupture disk will not interfere with the proper functioning of the
valve?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the rules of UG-127(a)(3)(b) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-1 16(e)(4)
File: BC00-680
Question: Is it required by UG-116(e)(4) of Section VIII, Division I to mark a vessel “RT-4” when
no radiography is performed on the vessel?
Reply: No. “RT” Marking per UG-116(e) is only applied when any part of a vessel has been
radiographed in accordance with UW-11(a) or (b)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.3 Sketch (b)
File: BCOO-688
Question: For the configuration shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch (b) of Section VIII, Division 1, the
extent of projection of the hub beyond the face of the flat head or tubesheet is not specified. Do the
requirements provide for minimum and maximum projection of the hub?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Table UCS-56 and UCS-68(c)
File: BC00-691 [BC00-708]
Question: A P-No. 1, Gr. No. 1 or 2 material with a thickness of t = 1.375 in. is welded. A 200oF
preheat is applied as permitted by Note (2)(b) of Table UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1. Is it then
permissible to apply a 30oF reduction in impact testing exemption temperature, as permitted by UCS-
68(c), if the vessel is also subjected to PWHT per Table UCS-56?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-39(b)(1) and Appendix 2
File: BC00-696
Question: May a reducing flange be designed in accordance with the rules of Appendix 2 in Section
VIII, Division 1, provided that the flange parameters can be obtained from the charts shown in Fig. 2-7.1
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-1 l6(e) and UNF-57
File: BC00-698
Question: A vessel is made of nonferrous material conforming to UNS N08904. The thickness
limitation given in UNF-57(c) is exceeded. Full radiography is carried out on all Category A and B weld
joints; however, only spot radiography is performed on nozzle to shell welded joints. The nozzle size
exceeds 10 NPS. Shall the marking be applied under the Code symbol “RT-4”?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-1 1 and Appendix 2
File: BC00-703
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-11(a)(2) and UG-44 in Section VIII, Division
1, may a flange meeting the requirements of API-10000, and using the rated pressure and temperature
specified in the Standard be used without additional calculations per UG-34 and Appendix 2?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-20(b), UG-99(b), UG-
100(b), and UG-116(a)(3) and (a)(4)
File: BC00-084
Question (1): An MAWP and MDMT of a vessel are initially established using the rules of Section
VIII, Division 1, Subsequently the rules of UCS-66(b)(1) are used to establish a second MDMT that is
colder than the initial MDMT at a coincident MAWP that is lower than the initial MAWP. Based on
footnote 37 in UG-116, may both the initial and second MAWP’s and MDMT’s be stamped on the
nameplate?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If multiple MDMTs are selected to be shown on the nameplate or stamping, must each
coincident pressure shown on the nameplate be identified as “MAWP” per UG-116(b)(4)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If multiple MAWP’s are shown on the nameplates or stamping, which MAWP is used to
comply with the minimum hydrostatic test requirements of UG-99?
Reply (3): The MAWP that, after applying the mandatory stress ratio (see UG-99 and UG-l00),
results in the highest test pressure.
Question (4): If multiple MAWP’s are shown on the nameplate or stamping, which MAWP is used to
comply with the pressure relief device requirements of UG-125 through UG-137?
Reply (4): The largest value; see UG-20(b).
Question (5): In the cases where multiple MAPW’s are shown on the nameplate or stamping, requiring
that the pressure relieving device(s) be set based on the largest value of MAWP, are Code rules available
for the administrative controls associated with the lower MAWP(s)?
Reply (5): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (i)
File: BC01-045
Question: An unsupported tubesheet is attached to the shell of a vessel as shown in Fig. (UW-13.2
sketch (i) of Section VIII, Division 1. Is the requirement that a + b be not less than 3ts determined in the
corroded condition?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-84 and Fig. UCS-66 Note
(e)
File: BC01-056
Question: In using the criteria of Fig. UG-84.1 in Section VIII, Division 1, may SA-320 Grades L-
7, L-7A, and L43 bolting material in combination with SA-194 Grades 4 and 7 (Supplementary
Requirements S4) be impact tested at -1500F for energy considerations, and be used without any
additional tests for lateral expansion for an MDMT of –150oF and warmer?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-99(g)(1) and UG-l00(d)(1)
File: BC01-81
Question: The requirements of UG-99(g)(l) and UG-100(d)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 specify
the use of a suitable gas leak test. May the applicable provisions of Article 10 of Section V be used to
satisfy the Section VIII rules?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-99(h) and Part UHA
File: BC01-092
Question: Do the requirements for Section VIII, Division 1 specify any limits on the chloride
content of the water used in performing the hydrostatic test, so as to prevent the impairment of corrosion
resistant properties of austenitic stainless steel materials?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); U-1(e)(1)(a)
File: BC00-705
Question: UG-44(c) permits the use of ASME B16.11 Fittings. A connection of a nozzle to a
pressure vessel is accomplished by having the following configuration: from the vessel wall a piece of
welded pipe, then a socket-welding elbow, another piece of pipe, and finally a flange. Since the Code
rules do not permit a single fillet attachment weld as applied for a socket-weld connection, is the welding
end connection for the first circumferential joint the only applicable boundary condition that is covered
under the rules of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes, see U-1(e)(1)(a)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); ULT-27, Table ULT-23, and
Code Case 2278
File: BC01-094
Question: A cryogenic vessel is constructed to the rules of Part ULT of Section VIII, Division 1 and
Code Case 2278. When calculating the vessel thickness per ULT-27, is it necessary to consider
intermediate temperature points between saturation [ULT-27(a)] and ambient [ULT-27(b)] when the
allowable stress at an intermediate temperature point is less than the values permitted at either the
saturation or ambient conditions?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-34(a) and Fig. UG-34
Sketch (f)
File: BC00-707
Question: Sketch (f) of Fig UG-34 in Section VIII, Division 1 is used for the attachment of a flat
head-to-shell connection. In determining the thickness of the head per UG-34, shall the dimension d be
the inside diameter of the shell in the corroded condition, instead of the uncorroded diameter of the shell
in the space between the two fillet welds?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Fig UW-l3.3 Sketch (b) and
Appendix 13, Fig. 13-2(a) Sketches (1), (2), and (7) to (9)
File: BC01-074
Question (1): Figure UW-13.3 sketch (b) of Section VIII, Division 1, specifies that the dimension e
is to be not less than the required thickness of a flat head or tubesheet. Is the required thickness
referenced by the figure that calculated by the equations of UG-34 for a flat head or Appendix AA (or
acceptable alternative method) for a tubesheet?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Are the equations for membrane and bending stress in Appendix 13 for noncircular
vessels based on each side of the vessel having a uniform thickness (i.e., no locally thin areas)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-36(b)(1) and Appendices 1,
1-7, and L, L-7.7
File: BC01-079
Question: A “hill-side” nozzle similar to the one described in Example 7 of L-7.7 in Appendix L of
Section VIII, Division I is being designed. The nozzle being designed has a major diameter of the opening
that exceeds the limitation given in UG-36(b)(1). Does Appendix 1, 1-7 apply to such “hillside” nozzles?
Reply: Yes. The requirements of 1-7(a) and 1-7(c) apply.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); 11-1(g)
File: BC01-091
Question: May a steam generator in which the heat transfer surface of the generator is subject to
radiant heat and products of combustion, be constructed per the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, U-1(g),
if the steam produced is used for internal use only?
Reply: Yes. However, as indicated by U-1(c). we caution you that the laws at the point of
installation may dictate the construction and as such must be reviewed to determine requirements that
may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UW-l6(c)
File: BC01-098
Question: Both the shell and the nozzle of a pressure vessel are to be jacketed in order to provide a
contiguous annulus over the surface of both elements. The inner surfaces of the jacketed welds will not be
accessible for visual examination. Does UW-16(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the weld which
joins the portion of the jacket that surrounds the nozzle to the portion of the jacket that surrounds the
shell?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-104
Question: A pressure vessel requiring PWHT is constructed in two sections. All of the Category
A and B weld joints are welded using the same WPS in the same position. A vessel (production) test
plate is welded as an extension to one of the longitudinal seams, and represents all of the Category
A and B weld joints. The two sections are PWHT separately in an enclosed furnace. The closing
circumferential weld seam is locally PWHT per UW-40(a)(3). The PWHT cycle is the same for both
furnace and local PWHT. In complying with the requirements of UG-84(f)(2) in Section VIII, Division
1, may the production test plate undergo a single PWHT cycle, as opposed to a double cycle?
Reply: Yes; however the time at temperature must be based on the double cycle.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UCS-67(d)(2)
File: BC01-105
Question: Does UCS-67(d)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 allow for an exemption of production
weld impact testing when welding SA-516 Grade 70 normalized materials, which are not exempted from
impact testing and when using a welding consumable which has been classified by impact tests at a
temperature not warmer than the MDMT by the applicable SFA specification?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Fig UCS-66.l
File: BC01-106
Question: A nozzle neck with a nominal noncorroded thickness that is heavier than that of the shell
is attached to the shell with corner joint, and thus the shell becomes the governing thickness as defined in
UCS-66(a)(1)(b). When evaluating the nozzle joint per UCS-66(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, are the tr
and tn thicknesses those of the shell?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-121
Question: A flange is welded to a nozzle similar to that shown in Appendix 2, 2-4, sketch (8) of
Section VIII, Division 1, except that the groove weld extends to the back of the fillet at the front face of
the flange to achieve full penetration, and the fillet on the side groove weld satisfies Fig. 2-4, sketch (7).
May this flange connection be classified as an integral type?
Reply: No, the flange described is classified as an Optional Type.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Code Case 2235-3
File: BC01-125
Question: Do the requirements under subparagraph (e) of the Reply in Code Case 2235-3 allow the
use of an imaginary fusion line?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.l Sketch (k)
File: BC01-199
Question: Figure UW-13.l sketch (k) of Section VIII, Division 1 shows requirements for butt welds
with one plate edge offset. Is it allowed to make a butt joint with one plate edge offset without the 1 ½ t
minimum overlap between the adjacent parts?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Appendix 28, 28-2(c), Use of
Backing Strips
File: BC0l-223
Question: In accordance with Appendix 28 of Section VIII, Division 1, may alternative corner weld
joints for box headers be made with the use of permanent backing strips that make the visual inspection
requirements of 28-2(c) not possible?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Appendix 13, Fig. 13-2 and Fig.
UW-13.3
File: BC01-225
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide details that are to be used when the welds that
attach the side plates of noncircular pressure vessels are to be butt welded’?
Reply (1): Figure 13.2(a) in Appendix 13, sketches (3), (5), (6a), and (6b) provide examples for the
construction of noncircular pressure vessels where the side plates may readily he welded using butt welds.
Note that any weld seams used in these sketches are classified Category A.
Question (2); May Fig. 13.3 sketches (a) or (b) be used for the construction of noncircular vessels
requiring the use of Type No. (1) or (2) butt welds for the Category C joints [for example, to satisfy lethal
service requirements of UW-2(a)(1)(b)]?
Reply (2): Yes, see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Lifting Lugs or Attachments
File: BC01-276
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 specify when lifting lugs or lifting attachments are to he
provided for a vessel?
Reply: No, this is considered to be a contractual matter between the purchaser and Manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-41 and UW-l5, Strength
Path Calculations
File: BC01-302
Question: Are weld strength calculations in UG-41 and UW-15 of Section VIII, Division 1,
required for the case where a nozzle neck-to-vessel attachment and reinforcing pad-to-nozzle neck
attachment are full penetration welded?
Reply: Yes, see Appendix L, L-7.8 for an example.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-44 and Appendix 2
File: BC01-303
Question: May a flange defined by one of the ASME flange standards referenced in UG-44 of
Section VIII, Division 1, be used at pressure-temperature conditions beyond that given by the standard if
all requirements of Appendix 2 are satisfied for the higher pressure-temperature conditions?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-192
Question: Are impact tests per UG-84 of welds made with filler metal required for welded
components constructed using Fig. UCS-66 Curve A or Curve B base material that have been exempted
from impact testing by the rules illustrated in Fig. UCS-66.2 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
File: BC97-401
Question: Is it the intent that a Manufacturer with multiple locations, each with their own
Certificate of Authorization, may transfer pressure vessel parts from one of their locations to another
without Partial Data Reports, provided the Quality Control System of the Manufacturer outlines methods
of identification, transfer and control of the parts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66 and Form U-lA
File: BC01-194
Question (1): If a head forming process requires a normalizing heat treatment such that Fig. UCS66
curve assignment in Section VIII, Division 1 could be changed from Curve B to Curve D, may the
construction rules and associated MDMT for the vessel for which the normalized head is a pressure-
boundary component be based on Curve B material?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For heads made of SA-516 Grade 70 plate that have been hot formed by a parts supplier
using a process that conforms with material specification normalizing and tempering requirements and
has been properly recorded on a Form U-2 Manufacturers Data Report, is it necessary to repeat the heat
treatment information on Form U-1A, line 8?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 (1998 Edition. 2000 Addenda): UF-7, Fabrication and Inspection
Requirements for Assemblies Made to SA-649 Material
File: BC01- 196
Question (1): In meeting requirements of UF-7 of Section VIII, Division I, are the rules of
construction, including the qualification of thc welding process, the welder, the MT procedure, and the
examiner to be applied in the manufacture of forged steel corrugating and pressure rolls used in
machinery for producing corrugated paper covered by SA-649 in Section II, Part A?
Reply (1): Yes
Question (2): The rolls described in Question (1) are manufactured in accordance with SA-649,
including the welding per paragraph 4.3. Is qualification of he welding process and welder required per
Section IX?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): The rolls described in Question (2) are MT examined in accordance with paragraph 8 of
SA 649. Is qualification of the MT examination procedure and the examiner required per Appendix
6 Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda): UG-116(h) and UG-120(c)
File: BC01-198
Question (1) Is it required by UG-116(h) of Section VIII, Division 1 that the parts Manufacturer mark
each part described on his Partial Data Report with the information described in UG-116(h)(1), (UG-
116(h)(2), and UG-116-(h)(3)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permitted by UG-116(h) that only one part of several identical parts listed on the
Manufacturer’s Partial Data Report shall be marked by the pails Manufacturer in accordance with UG-
116(h), when the parts Manufacturer and the Manufacturer of the completed vessel are serviced by the
same Authorized Inspection Agency and Authorized Inspector?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-29(a), Certification of
Welders and Welding Operators
File: BC01-215
Question: In meeting the qualification requirements for welders and welding operators per
UW29(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, may a Manufacturer accept welding certification tests issued by
another organization, such as a state education agency?
Reply: No; see QW-300.2 of Section IX.
Interpretation: VIII-1-0l-52
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); IJW-40(a)(8), Local PWHT of
Longitudinal Joints
File: BC01-216
Question: May local PWHT of longitudinal welds seams be performed by any method that isolates
the heated area to the weld and a zone adjacent to the weld, without heating the total circumference of the
shell?
Reply: Yes provided the rules of UW-40(a)(8) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UG-117(f)
File: BC01-222
Question: A Manufacturer holds a Certificate of Authorization for the manufacture of pressure

vessels at its location and field sites controlled by that location. May the Manufacturer temporarily
occupy some other manufacturing facility and, by controlling it as described in their Quality Control
Manual, declare this as a Field site under the Certificate of Authorization?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); Appendix W, Table W-3
File: BC01-224
Question: When supplying vessel parts, other than heads of welded construction, with a Partial Data
Report Form U-2 or Form U-2A, must the joint efficiency of the welds used in the design calculations be
stated on Data Report?
Reply: No, see Notes 24 and 26 of Table W-3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-99 and UG-l00
File: BC01-226
Question (1): Is it permitted to conduct the hydrostatic test of a pressure vessel at a pressure greater
than required by UG-99(b) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-99(d).
Question (2): Is it permitted to pneumatically test a pressure vessel at a pressure that exceeds 1.1 times
the maximum allowable working pressure to be stamped on the vessel multiplied by the lowest ratio of
stress as defined in UG-100(b)?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the test pressure does not exceed 1.1 times the basis for calculated test
pressure as defined in Appendix 3, 3-2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UHA-51(c)
File: BC01-285
Question: Do the requirements of UHA-51(c) in Section VIII, Division 1 apply when a one piece
elliptical cold formed head made from SA-240 Grade 304 material is solution annealed at 1040oC
(1904oF)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-32(d) and UCS-79
File: BC01-288
Question (1): A 2:1 ellipsoidal head is being fabricated from flat plate having a thickness t with a
spherical radius of 0.90D and knuckle radius of 0.17D, where D = inside diameter of the head, based on
UG-32(d) of Section VIII, Division 1. When applying UCS-79, where there is not an intermediate heat
treatment performed during the forming operation, is the original center line radius equal to infinity and
the final line radius equal to 0.17D + t/2?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does the head described in Question (1), which is manufactured as a flange and dished
head, and a head formed having the exact dimensions of a 2:1 ellipsoidal shape both meet the
requirements of UG-32(d)?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC01-295
Question: Will visual examination meet the inspection requirements of UG-93(d)(2) in Section
VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-296
Question: A flange is to be subjected to internal design pressure; however, the flange will also be
subjected to a constant nonvarying external pressure. Using the provisions of Appendix 2 in Section VIII,
Division I, what pressure should be used to determine Wm1 in paragraph 2-5(c)?
Reply: See U-2(g).
File: BC01-297
Question: In the manufacture of box headers for air-cooled heat exchangers, Appendix 28 in
Section VIII, Division 1 is used for the corner weld joints at the long side to short side attachments and at
the long and short side attachments to the end plates. Based on the requirements of 28-2(a), shall sample
corner joints be prepared for each combination of corner joint thicknesses when the different thicknesses
are used for the long and short sides, and the end plates?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-300
Question: A nozzle is located in a shell made of welded pipe for which the allowable stress listed in
Section II, Part D has a factor of 0.85 applied. When determining the minimum nozzle neck thickness in
accordance with UG-45(b)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1, may allowable stress for the shell material, as
listed in Section II, Part D, be divided by 0.85 in order to determine the shell thickness to be used in this
paragraph?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Appendix AA, AA-2.4.l
File: BC01-313
Question: In determining the value of d* in Section VIII, Division I, Appendix AA, AA-2.4.l, the
tube expansion depth ratio is calculated. For full strength welded tube-to-tubesheet joints without any
tube extension, shall a value of tube expansion depth ratio of zero be used?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-11(a) and UW-12(d)
File: BC01-315
Question (1): UW-l2(d) of Section VIII, Division I specifies that calculations involving circumferential
stress in seamless vessel sections shall use E = 0.85 when the Category A or B welds connecting seamless
vessel sections are Type No. 3, 4, 5, or 6 of Table UW-l2. Do the requirements apply if the weld attaching
seamless vessel sections is Category C?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it required that Category C joints be Type No. 1 or No. 2 of Table UW-12 when a
vessel is to meet the Full Radiography requirements of UW-l 1(a)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (1998 Edition, 1999 Addenda); UCS-67(a)(2)
File: BC01-317
Question: Do welding consumables which do not have a prior impact test classification in
accordance with an applicable SFA specification, but are supplied by a manufacturer with certified impact
test values at the MDMT or colder for each batch supplied, comply with UCS-67(a)(2) requirements in
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-333
Question: When using UG-10l in Section VIII, Division 1 as the design criteria, would it be
acceptable to use a proof test from another stamp holder if all the design criteria remains the same and the
parts conform to UG-101(d)(1) or UG-101(d)(2). Given that all other parameters are met and the current
Manufacturer reviews and approves the proof test and provides for outside proof testing in the Quality
Control Manual, may a proof test be transferable between stamp holders if all requirements are met?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1-01 -66

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Appendix 1, 1-7, Figs. 1-7-1 and
1-7-2, and l-7(b)(4)
File: BC01-335
Question: For nozzle connection where no part of the flange is located within the projection limits
indicated in Fig. 1-7-1 Case A or B, or Fig. 1-7-2 Case A or B of Section VIII, Division 1, does the
greater of the applicable cased limits in either Fig. 1-7-1 or Fig. 1-7-2 apply for bending stress
calculation?
Reply: Yes, see Appendix 1, l-7(b)(4).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.3 and Appendix A,
Fig. A-2
File: BC01-301
Question (1): May a tubesheet extended as a flange use the hub details shown in Fig. UW-13.3 sketch
(b) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, see U-2(g).
Question (2): Is the weld reinforcement beyond the face of the tubesheet included in the weld size
dimension a in Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix A, Fig. A-2?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-90(b)(2) and UG-90(b)(l8)
File: BC01-348
Question (1): May a Manufacturer subcontract the preparation of thc drawings and design calculations
for a pressure vessel to an engineer or engineering firm that does not hold a U stamp?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, must the Manufacturer still sign the Certificate of Shop
Compliance (including design) block on the Manufacturer’s Data Report Form?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); ULT-99
File: BC01-351
Question: In the construction of cryogenic vessels under Part ULT of Section VIII, Division 1, is it
permitted to substitute a pneumatic test per UG-l00 (except that the ratio of stresses is not applied) in lieu
of the hydrostatic test required by ULT-99, if condition UG-100(a)(2) applies?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-22, UG-23(c), and
Appendix 4, 4-112
File: BC01-380
Question (1): Does UG-22 of Section VIII, Division 1 require that the local stress in a vessel head or
shell at a support gusset, resulting from seismic or wind loadings, be considered in the vessel design?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the local bending stress in a vessel head or shell at a vessel support gusset, resulting
from a mechanical load such as seismic or wind condition, a primary stress as defined in Appendix 3-2 of
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Does UG-23(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 limit the combination of local bending stress,
such as that described in Question (2), plus the general membrane stress resulting from pressure to 1.5
times the maximum allowable stress value in tension?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): If the reply to Question (3) is no, what is the appropriate limit for the combination of the
local bending stress, as described above, and the general membrane stress due to pressure?
Reply (4): Section VIII, Division 1 does not provide rules for the combination of localized bending
stresses resulting from mechanical loads at supports with the general primary membrane stress resulting
from pressure. See U-2(g).
Question (5): If the vessel, as described in the previous questions, was designed in accordance with the
rules of Section VIII, Division 2, would the local bending stress at the support gusset be categorized as a
secondary stress as defined by Appendix 4, 4-112 of Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (5): Yes.
File: BC01-412
Question (1): When using a welded plug to fill in a spin hole per UW-34 of Section VIII, Division 1,
may the plug material be of a specification different from the head material?
Reply (1): Yes
Question (2): Is it acceptable, under the requirements of UW-34, to use a plug material having an
allowable stress which is lower than that of the head material to fill a spin hole?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Shall the welded plug described in Questions (1) and (2) meet the material requirements
(such as impact testing) and design requirements (such as minimum thickness requirements of UG-32 or
UG-33, as applicable) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: References to Edition and Addenda
File: BC01-570
Question (1): The 1998 Code Edition, as published, incorporates the 1998 Addenda. When providing
reference to this Code Edition and Addenda within a Code-required document, may only the Edition be
listed (i.e., 1998 Edition)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the 1998 Edition only, is it necessary to revise Code-required documentation where
the term “1998 Edition” was used as meaning the 1995 Edition through the 1997 Addenda?
Reply (2): No.

Volume 50 Interpretations
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UCS-85, Heat Treatment of Test
Specimens
File: BC01-287
Question: A hot finished SA-106 Grade B pipe is to be swaged to an elliptical shape at about 7000C
0
(1292 F) and then normalized or annealed before welding to the carbon steel vessel. The tensile test
properties as shown on the Material Test Report exceed the specified minimum tensile strength per the
material specification. The completed vessel is postweld heat treated per Code requirements. In meeting
the requirements of UCS-85 of Section VIII, Division 1, is it required to subject the test specimens to the
same heat treatment conditions as those encountered during fabrication?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); U-1(g)
File: BC0 1-321
Question: May a pressure vessel in which steam at pressure above 15 psi is generated for use
external to itself, by the heat produced by a burner using liquid or gaseous fuel installed in a combustion
chamber, be “U” stamped?
Reply: Yes, see U-1(c)(2). However as indicated by U-l(c), we caution you that the laws at the
point of installation may dictate the construction and as such must be reviewed to determine requirements
that may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-1 16(h) and UG-120(c),
Marking of Parts and Partial Data Reports
File: BC01-377
Question (1): May two or more parts intended to be installed on a single pressure vessel be documented
on a single U-2 or U-2A Manufacturer’s Partial Data Report?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, may only one part be marked in accordance with UG-
116(h) and each of the remaining parts be permanently marked in a manner that is traceable to the Partial
Data Report?
Reply (2): No.
10, Drawing Revision Number
File: BC01-379
Question: Is it required that the revision number of the drawing listed on line 4 of the U-1 or U-lA
Data Report Forms in Section VIII, Division 1, correspond to the completed vessel at the time of Code
stamping?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-99(b), Stress Ratio
File: BC01-406
Question: When a vessel is constructed to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 using materials with
various allowable stresses, is it required by UG-99(b) that a hydrostatic test be carried out for the most
severe condition, that is, the highest ratio of allowable stresses for all materials of construction provided
that no materials are subjected to a stress exceeding 90% of the material yield strength?
Reply: No. The requirements of UG-99(b) state the minimum test pressure to be 1.3 MAWP
multiplied by the lowest ratio of stress values. Per UG-99(d), there are no upper limits on the test
pressure.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-34 and Appendix 2
File: BC01-407
Question (1): When applying formula (5) of UG-34 in Section VIII, Division 1 for the design of a
cover, with a geometry as shown in sketch (k) of Fig. UG-34, is it permissible to use 1.5 times S in that
portion of the equation applicable to the bolt load W instead of S?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it mandatory to use footnote 2 of 2-5(e) in Appendix 2, where the full available bolt
load Ab Sa is considered as the flange design bolt load, for the design of circular or rectangular bolted
covers?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC01-408
Question: May the provisions of Appendix 28 in Section VIII, Division 1 be applied to weld the
side plates of a rectangular box header for an air cooled heat exchanger if one or both plates has a radius
at the weld groove as schematically shown in Fig. UW-l3.3 sketch (b)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-9(c) and Appendix 14,
Transition Requirements
File: BC01-411
Question (1): A bolted U-tube heat exchanger design utilizes the configuration shown on the left side of
Fig. 14-1 of Appendix 14 in Section VIII, Division 1. The “shell” in Fig. 14-1 is the tube side channel and
the “nozzle” in Fig. 14-1 is the shell side shell. The integral flat head has tapped holes for the attachment
of the bolted tubesheet of the U-tube bundle, which is inserted into the shell. Do the rules of Appendix 14
together with the rules of Appendix 2 apply to the design of this configuration?
Reply (1): No, see U-2(g).
Question (2): For the heat exchanger configuration described in Question (1), do the requirements of
UW-9(c) apply to the tapered transitions?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC01-589
Question: When the nozzle has a different corrosion allowance than the shell (or head) it attaches
to, shall the shell (or head) corrosion allowance be used in applying UG-45(b)(1) and UG-45(b)(2) in
Section VIII, Division 1, and the nozzle corrosion allowance be used in applying UG-45(a), and
UG45(b)(4)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC01-591
Question: Paragraph UG-22(b) in Section VIII, Division 1 requires that the additional pressure
resulting from the static head of liquids be considered in the design of pressure vessels. May the effect of
liquid static head that is specified be ignored if it results in a pressure that is small with respect to the
vessel’s MAWP?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-22 and UG-23(d)
File: BC1-592
Question: Paragraph UG-22 in Section VIII, Division 1 requires that loadings resulting from wind
and seismic events be considered in the design of a pressure vessel such that the stress limits of UG-23
are satisfied. When combining the stresses resulting from wind and seismic loadings with the stresses
resulting from pressure, shall the MAWP as shown on the nameplate be used for establishing the pressure
stresses?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-20(f)
File: BC01-607
Question: May the nominal thickness used to obtain impact testing exemptions per UG-20(f)(1) of
Section VIII, Division 1 be calculated using the procedure described in Fig. UCS-66.2, General Note (1)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-31(d) and UW-33(a)
File: BC01-325
Question (1): In meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, may the over thickness
tolerance, as permitted by the plate specification, be excluded from the maximum offset in evaluating the
alignment tolerances of UW-31(d) and UW-33?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May the maximum offset per UW-33(a) be increased by an amount equal to the
difference between the actual thickness and the required thickness?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC01-403
Question: Are Welding Procedure Qualifications, prepared in accordance with UG-84 in Section
VIII, Division 1, exempt from impact testing of the welds and heat affected zones (HAZ), when materials
meeting the definitions in UCS-67(a)(2) are joined by welding consumables that have been assigned an
impact-test temperature classification number based on the results of impact tests at a temperature not
warmer than the MDMT?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UCS-56(e), PWHT of Alloy 800
Materials
File: BC01-588
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 require postweld heat treatment of pressure boundary
welds and welds to pressure boundaries in vessels with design temperatures above 10000F fabricated from
UNS No. N08800 (Alloy 800), UNS No. N088l0 (Alloy 800H), and UNS No. N08811 (Alloy 800HT)
materials regardless of thickness?
Reply (1): Yes, see UNF-56(e)(1).
Question (2): In the vessel described in Question (1), the calculated forming strains in the head exceed
the limits in Table UNF-79. Accordingly, the head is solution annealed per UNF-79(a)(1) and Table
UNF-79. Is subsequent postweld heat treatment per UNF-56(e)(1) required?
Reply (2): No, provided the solution annealing is in accordance with the material specification for
the head plate material.
Question (3): When postweld heat treatment of the vessels described in Question (1) is required, does
Section VIII, Division 1 specify what cooling and heating rates are required?
Reply (3): No, see UNF-56(e).
File: BC01-635
Question: When the hydrostatic test pressure exceeds the value given in UG-99(b) or UG-99(c), as
allowed by UG-99(d), do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 require that the actual stress or strain of the
vessel components be monitored by strain gauges to assure that the material yield strength has not been
exceeded?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-l 1(a)(5)(b) and UW-12(e)
File: BC01-636
Question: Category C corner joints [such as shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (m)] are used to attach
flanges to a welded pipe that does not have circumferential butt welds in its assembly. In accordance with
UW-12(e) of Section VIII, Division 1, is it correct to use E = 1.0 and the allowable tensile stress taken
from the welded product values of the stress tables for calculations involving circumferential stress in the
welded pipe since no Category B or C butt welds exist in the assembly?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1 -01 -90

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-37 and Fig. UG-37
File: BC01 -639
Question (1): Is it mandatory to use the factor F, as given in Fig. UG-37 of Section VIII, Division 1, for
determining the reinforcement requirements of integrally reinforced openings in cylinders and cones?
Reply (1): No, the value of F = 1.0 may be used, at the designer’s option.
Question (2): May the factor F, as given in Fig. UG-37, be used in determining the reinforcement
requirements for integrally reinforced nozzles in cylinders and cones when the nozzle is oblique or
tangential to the vessel surface?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is the angle theta, as shown in Fig. UG-37, measured with respect to the cylinder or
cone’s longitudinal axis whereby a plane cut through the opening in the vessel’s longitudinal direction
results in F = 1.0, and a plane cut through the opening in the vessel’s circumferential direction results in F
= 0.5?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Fig. UG-37 and Appendix 13
File: BC01-640
Question (1): Is the factor F, as given in Fig. UG-37, applicable to the reinforcement requirements for
openings in rectangular box headers designed in accordance with Appendix 13?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide a design procedure that is applicable to single
openings in the rectangular vessels when the opening is large with respect to width of the side plate where
the opening is located?
Reply (2): No, see Appendix 13, 13-4(j).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UCS-7, Use of SA-105 Material
File: BC01-340
Question: Is SA-105 permitted for pad-type (studding outlet) nozzles, such as depicted in Fig. UG-
40, sketch (a-2) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UCS-67(a)(2) and UCS67(d)(2)
File: BC01-647
Question (1): Per UCS-67(d)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1, may production impact tests of welds be
waived if the material being joined is not a Curve C or D material, is not exempt from impact testing, but
is being joined with welding consumables classified with impact tests at a temperature not warmer than
the MDMT?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): A material being joined is a Curve C or D material with an MDMT of -50”F, which is not
exempted from impact testing by the appropriate curve. If the material is joined with welding
consumables classified with impact tests at a temperature not warmer than the MDMT, does UCS-
67(d)(2) require that production impact tests be performed?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC01-649
Question: When a chemical reaction occurs within a pressure vessel due to an external fire, is it
permissible to install a pressure relief device or devices that meet the requirements of UG- 125(c)(2) of
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-134(b) are met.
Interpretation: VIII-1-01~95
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-136(d)
File: BC01 -692
Question: Are the rules of UG-102 in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to the test gages used to
test safety relief devices per UG-136(d)?
Reply: No, see UG-131(f).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-l36(b)
File: BC01-701
Question (1): Is the pilot of a pilot operated pressure relief valve required to meet the rules of UG-
136(b)(3) and (b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is the interconnecting tubing between the relieving device and its pilot, the tube fittings
and other components of a pilot operated pressure relief valve required to meet the rules of UG-136(b)(3)
and (b)(4) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC00-465
Question (1): U-1(c)(2)(h) provides an exemption from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 for
vessels having an internal or external operating pressure not exceeding 15 psi with no limitation on size.
(a) Does this exemption apply to U- 1(h) [pressure vessels or parts subject to direct
firing from the combustion of fuel (solid, liquid, or gaseous), which is not within the scope of
Section I, III or IV]?
(b) Does this exemption apply to gas fired jacketed steam kettles as described in U-
1(i)?
Reply (1): (a) Yes.

(b) No, see Appendix 9, 9-1(c) for scope limitations.
Question (2): U-1(c)(2)(b) provides an exemption from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 for
vessels having an inside diameter, width, height, or cross section diagonal not exceeding 6 in. with no
limitation on length of vessel or pressure.
(a) Does this exemption apply to U-1(h) [pressure vessel or parts subject to direct
firing from the combustion of fuel (solid, liquid, or gaseous), which is not within the scope of
Section I, III, or IV]?
(b) Does this exemption apply to gas fired jacketed steam kettles as described in U-
1(i)?
Reply (2): (a) Yes.

(b) Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(c)
File: BC01-227
Question: Are pressure vessels that are integral parts of a compressor, which have external gas
piping connections, exempt from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 per U-1(c)(2)(c)?
Reply: Yes, provided that the primary design considerations and/or stresses are derived from the
functional requirements of the device. Please note that the laws or regulations of jurisdictions where the
device is installed should be reviewed to determine requirements, which may be different or more
restrictive.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); U-2(g) and UG-19
File: BC01-326
Question (1): Do feedwater heater tubes and tubesheets constitute pressure boundaries? Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, must the tubes and tubesheets satisfy all relevant Code
requirements?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-1 16(j)
File: BC01-644
Question: For a pressure vessel with two independent pressure chambers welded together via an
intermediate head, may only one nameplate be used which lists one set of operating conditions applicable
to both chambers?
Reply: Yes, however, the nameplate should clearly indicate that the operating conditions
(MAWP, Tmax , MDMT) are applicable to both chambers; in addition the maximum differential pressure
shall be stated for the intermediate head.
File: BC01-341
Question: When test specimens are subjected to simulated heat treatment cycles according to
UCS85(c) in Section VIII, Division 1, must the requirements regarding the preparation of test specimens
conform to the material specification, including the referenced general specifications?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-l33(a)
File: BC01-702
Question: Do the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-133(a) apply to a single relief device?
Reply: No. See UG-125(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-116(a)(2), Notes 37 and 38,
and Appendix 23
File: BC01-724
Question (1): Is it permitted by UG-20(d) of Section VIII, Division 1 to design tubes in a shell and tube
heat exchanger by considering the tubes as a zone using the maximum mean metal temperature of the
tube (taken through the tube wall at any point in the bundle) that is expected in operation?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, how shall this be documented on the MDR and the
vessel nameplate?
Reply (2): The MAWP and corresponding design temperature for each zone shall be specified on
the data report and nameplate.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Appendix W, U-lA Forms
File: BC01-793
Question: For pressure vessels constructed according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 and
documented on a U-1A Form, may the term “welded” be used on item 10 to describe “How Attached” if
use of this term is acceptable to the Inspector?
Reply: Yes. See Interpretation VIII-1-83-322 for additional information.
File: BC01-336
Question: A circular blind flange, used as an unstayed flat head, has a nozzle attached at its
center using a full penetration weld, or a partial penetration weld, or a screwed connection. Are
reinforcement calculations per UG-39 of Section VIII, Division 1 required for this geometry if the
opening in the blind flange is of a size that is permitted in the flange standard referenced in UG34(c)(1)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-23(a), Use of Material
Tensile Strength to Calculate Wall Thickness
File: BC01-521
Question: May the tensile strength recorded on a Material Test Report be used to calculate the wall
thickness of a pressure vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Fig. UG-34 Sketch (m)
File: BC01-651
Question: Is it required that the retaining ring shown on sketch (m) of Fig. UG-34 of Section VIII,
Division 1 be of Code material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Table U-3
File: BC01-795
Question (1): When fabricating vessels using components that include pipe flanges and flanged fittings,
factory-made wrought steel butt weld fittings, or forged fittings, socket-welding and threaded, is it a
requirement of Section VIII, Division 1 for a Manufacturer to possess a copy of ASME B 16.5, B16.9, or
B16.11?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for a Manufacturer to possess a copy
of ASNT SNT-TC-1A?
Reply (2): No. See Interpretations VIII-l-83-156 and VIII-1-89-90 for additional information.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Fig. UG-34 and Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4
File: BC01-801
Question (1): The minimum required thickness t indicated on sketch (j) in Fig. UG-34 of Section VIII,
Division 1 includes the raised face thickness. Should this raised face thickness be excluded in the
calculations of a flat cover, similar to how it is handled for flanges designed per Appendix 2?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When designing a flat head with a geometry as given by Fig. UG-34 sketch (p), is it
correct to use Eq. (1) of UG-34(c) for circular heads and Eq. (3) of UG-34(c) for non-circular heads?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-84(i), UCS-67 and
Appendix 28
File: BC01-843
Question (1): For box headers with Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 28 alternative corner joints,
constructed of base materials exempt from impact testing at an MDMT of -400F, welded with impact test
qualified at –50oF welding procedures, are production impact tests in accordance with UG-84(i) required?
Reply (1): No, production impact tests are only required for Category A and B joints.
Question (2): May a specific heat/lot of welding consumables that has been classified by impact tests at
a temperature colder than the temperature listed in the appropriate part of Section II Part C be used in
UCS-67 to establish a colder MDMT?
Reply (2): No.
Volume 51
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (1998 Edition, 1998 Addenda); UG-125 and Code Case
2211
File: BC99-084
Question: May pressure-reducing valves and/or similar mechanical or electrical control devices be
used as integral components of a system of overpressure protection under the provisions of Code Case
2211?
Reply: Yes, provided these components are specifically considered in the analysis required by
paragraph (c) of the Reply in Code Case 2211, and the analysis is documented and signed as required by
paragraph (d)(4).

File: BC99-573
Question (1): Do the requirements of UG-129(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 allow a rupture disk device
to have a nameplate, which is attached to the disk by adhesive?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-119(e)(3).
Question (2): Do the requirements of UG-129(e) of Section VIII, Division 1 allow a rupture disk to
have a printed ASME “UD” Code symbol stamp on the nameplate?
Reply (2): No, see UG-119(c).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition); Note (2) of Fig. UG-28.1
File: BC00-591
Question: Is it the intent that the term “each section” in Note (2) of Fig. UG-28. 1 in Section VIII,
Division 1, includes the conical reducer section for determining the minimum required thickness when the
conical reducer section thickness meets the Note (1) requirements?
Reply: No.
File: BC01-606
Question: Is it the intent under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, paragraph 2-
2(b) to allow production of ferritic steel flanges exceeding 3 in. in thickness from quenched and tempered
material?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UW-16(f)(3) and Appendix 9, 9-6
File: BC01-870
Question: A threaded fitting, meeting the definition of paragraph UG-11(a) in Section VIII,
Division 1, penetrates both the inner and outer wall of a jacketed vessel. May such a fitting be attached by
a fillet weld deposited on the outside surface of the vessel and jacket if all the provisions of UW-16(f)(3)
are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIII-1 -01 -116

File: BC01-912
Question: When designing a loose flange in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2,
is it required to apply a corrosion allowance to the flange dimensions?
Reply: The Code does not address when a corrosion allowance is required. It is the owner’s (or
his designated agent’s) responsibility to determine the need for corrosion allowance. The decision to
include any corrosion allowance for a loose flange is considered to be a contractual matter between the
purchaser and the Manufacturer.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-101(m)
File: BC02-102a
Question: For vessels stamped to the 2001 Edition or later of Section VIII, Division 1, is it
permitted to establish the MAWP (maximum allowable working pressure) for new vessels components
using the test factor of 4 currently permitted in UG-101(m)(2)(a) and UG-101(m)(2)(c) that were
previously proof tested to a prior edition?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UW-2
File: BC02-106a
Question: May SA312 Type 304 welded pipe be used for the shell of or for nozzles in pressure
vessels constructed according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 and designated for Lethal Service if
the requirements of UW-2 are met?
Reply: Yes, provided that the longitudinal seams are fully radiographed per UW-11(a)(1). See
also UG-8(a).
File: BC02-2318
Question (1): A vessel has supplemental loads (as described in UG-22) applied to it such that the
longitudinal stress governs the required thickness. Must this required thickness, based on longitudinal
stress, be used as "tr" when conducting the nozzle reinforcement calculations in accordance with UG-37
of Section VIII Division 1?
Reply (I): No.
Question (2): If the Reply to Question (1) is “No”, then what rules apply?
Reply (2): See U-2(g).
Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UW-3
File: BC02-2681
Question: A long weld neck flange is connected to the shell of a pressure vessel with a butt weld. In
accordance with weld joint definitions of paragraph UW-3 of Section VIII, Division 1, is this weld a
Category C weld joint?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-20(f), UCS-66, Fig. UCS-66, and UCS-
68(e)
File: BC02-2427
Question: Is it permissible to apply the temperature reduction of UCS-68(c) to pressure vessels or

pressure parts whose MDMT is determined by application of the rules in UG-20(f)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-46(g)(l)
File: BC02-2562
Question: UG-46(g)(l) states the minimum dimensions required for elliptical or obround manholes.
Is it required per ASME Section VIII, Division I that these dimensions apply to inside diameter in the
uncorroded condition?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UCS-66, Marking MDMT on Nameplate
File: BC02-2314
Question: In Section VIII, Division I, is it permitted to list as the MDMT at MAWP on the
nameplate a temperature which is warmer than the MDMT determined either by test or by application of
the UCS-66 exemption rules?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Appendix 13, Fig. 13-2(a) Sketch (3)
File: BC02-2310
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 13, provide rules for non-circular vessels
similar to that shown in sketch (3) of Fig. 13-2(a) except that the side plates have different thicknesses?
Reply: No, see paragraph 13-1(c).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-41(b)(l) and Appendix L, Examples L7.2
and L-7.5
File: BC96-381
Question: In complying with the requirements of UG-41(b)(l) in Section VIII, Division 1, is it the
intent that performing the outer fillet weld check as given in Examples L-7.2 and L-7.5 of Appendix L be
mandatory?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-29 and UG-30
File: BC02-2744
Question (1): When conducting calculations in accordance with UG-29 and UG-30 of Section
VIII Division 1 for determining stiffening ring size and stiffening ring attachment weld size, is it
acceptable to use the nominal shell thickness (less corrosion allowance) if this value is larger than the
minimum required shell thickness?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In example L-5.3 of Section VIII, Division I, what is the definition of the term “Q”?
Reply (2): “Q” is the first moment of the area as defined in strength of material engineering
textbooks.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Hydrostatic Test
File: BC02-105a
Question: A threaded fitting is attached to a pressure vessel per the rules of Section VIII, Division I,
UW-16(f). The vessel is then hydrostatically tested per UG-99. Is it permissible under the rules of Section
VIII, Division 1 to install an extension pipe into the threaded fitting and seal weld with no additional
hydrostatic testing?
Reply: Yes.
Volume 52
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (2001 Edition); UG-136(b)(3)
File: BC02-3595
Question: Is it a requirement that the materials used in the construction of bodies, bonnets or yokes
of pressure relief valves pet the requirements of UG-136(b)(3) shall meet the applicable toughness rules
of ASME Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC02-2791
Question: When constructing a plate and frame heat exchanger containing two pressure streams with
the same pressure and temperature rating, is it permissible in Section VIII, Division 1 to apply the
required marking of UG-116 as a single chamber only?
Reply: No, any vessel which contains two or more chambers that fall within the scope of the
Code must be marked in a manner to identify the required marking for each chamber. See UG-116(j).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UCS-68(c)
File: BC02-2793
Question: When an entire vessel is postweld heat-treated at least one weld joint requires PWHT per
Code rules, may individual weld joints that did not require PWHT per Code rules be permitted to use to
provision of UCS-68(c)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII. Division 1 (2001 Edition); U-1(c)(2)(e)
File: BC02-3353
Question: A component in a processing system serves the purpose of filtering or straining the
process fluid. In accordance with the provisions of para. U-1(c)(2)(e). such components may be
considered exempt from the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, provided the pressure containing parts of
such components are generally recognized as piping components or accessories. If such a component is
made using a special closure containing elements not generally recognized as a standard piping
component, is the scope exemption allowed by para. U-l(c)(2)(e) applicable?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-44(j)
File: BC02-2920
Question: Is it acceptable, under the provisions of para. UG-44 of Section VIII, Division 1, to use
an integral flange/nozzle neck machined from a forging if the flange dimensions, including the hub, meet
the ASME B16.5 requirements and the nozzle neck meets the requirements of para. UG-45?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII. Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UW-12
File: BC02-4004
Question: May a Joint Type 6 of Table UW- 12 (single fillet welded lap joint) be used for a
Category B joint to connect two cylinders?
Reply: No, Joint Type 6 of Table UW-12 is only applicable for the attachment of heads to shells.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 (2001 Edition); Appendix 28, Fig. 28-1
File: BC02-2640
Question: In meeting the requirements of 28-2(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, may a butt-weld
coupon he used to qualify the weld procedure, welder or welding operator, provided the tolerances of 28-
2(a)(1) and 28-2(a)(2) are met?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UW-11(a)(5)(b), UW-12(d), and
UW-12(e)
File: BC02-4115
Question: Electric resistance welded tubes are used in a heat exchanger and are attached to the
tubesheets by welding or mechanical expansion. Since there is no Category B or C butt joints associated
with the tubes that would invoke the requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b), is it correct to use a joint efficiency
E= 1.0 in accordance with UW-12(d) and UW-12(e) when determining the required wall thickness due to
internal pressure as required by UG-27 and UG-31?
Reply: Yes.
Volume 53 Starts Here:
Revisions to an Interpretation Published in a Previous Volume
Interpretation: VIII-l-89-247R
File: BC02-2474*
Question: May a manufacturer, who holds a valid ASME Certification of Authorization and Code
Symbol Stamp, contract a shop, which does not hold a valid ASME Certification of Authorization and
Code Symbol stamp, to fabricate vessels requiring the ASME Code Stamp when the non-Code shop’s
welders are qualified under the Certificate Holder’s WPS’s, and all provisions of UW-26(d) in Section
VIII, Division 1 are met, and are under the control of the Certificate Holder’s Quality Control manager?
Reply: No.
Subject: ection VIII, Division I; UW-11 and UCS-57
File: BC03-268*
radiographic examination required by UW-11 of Section VIII, Division 1 be performed after the postweld
heat treatment?
Reply: No, except that UHA-33(b) and UHA-33(c) require radiographic examination after
PWHT.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Appendix 2, 2-5 and Appendix 24, Fig. 24-1
File: BC01-329
Question (1): For flanges designed in accordance with Appendix 2, Section VIII, Division I using self-
energized gaskets, does the gasket diameter G extend out to the outer diameter of the groove the gasket
fits?
Reply (1): Yes, see Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2, 2-5.
Question (2): May diameter G be set equal to diameter C when self-energized gaskets are used?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Should the G dimension for self-energized gaskets used in design of clamp connections
designed in accordance with Appendix 24, Section VIII, Division 1, extend out to the outer diameter of
the groove as shown in Fig. 24-1?
Reply (3): Yes, see definition of G in 24-3 and sketches in Fig. 24-1; also reference 2-5 in Section
VIII, Division 1, Appendix 2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition); UCS-66(a), Fig. UCS-66, and UHT-6
File: BC99-102
Question (1): Do the requirements of UHT-6(a)(3) and UHT-6(a)(4) apply to integrally forged vessels
manufactured without welded seams from SA-372 material in the quenched and tempered condition with
a specified minimum tensile strength of 95,000 psi or greater?
Reply (I): Yes, see para. UG-84(c)(4)(b).
Question (2): For an integrally forged vessel, manufactured from SA-372 material without welded
seams, is the minimum required thickness of the dished head portion of the vessel the governing thickness
referenced in para. UCS-66(a)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-20(a)
File: BC01-405
Question: For Section VIII, Division 1 vessels, is it required to consider the most severe condition
of coincident pressure and temperature expected in normal operation including abnormal conditions
which may become a governing design condition?
Reply: Yes. See UG-2(a), UG-20, and UG-21.

Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (2001 Edition); UG-99(f), UG-l00(d), and AT-355
File: BC01-774
Question: May welds in nozzles found to be leaking during visual inspection required by UG-99(f),
UG- 100(d), and AT-335 be repaired and hydrostatically retested using a device that seals the part without
requiring a full hydrostatic retest of the vessel?
Reply: No.
Note: This Interpretation also appears as VIII-2-01-l5.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Fig. UW-13.2, Sketch (c), and Appendix 28, 28-
2(c)
File: BC02-2305
Question: In meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, is visual examination of the
inside corner required of a joint configuration as shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (2001 Edition); Appendix A, Shear Load Test Specimen
File: BC02- 2426
Question: If it is elected to use the provisions of Appendix A of Section VIII, Division 1 to

determine the allowable tube-to-tubesheet loading for a heat exchanger, are there any provisions in the
shear load testing requirements of the Appendix that would permit reducing the number of specimens or
the number of tubes required in the specimen if the tube spacing in the exchanger is large?
Reply: No.
File: BC02-2428
Question (I): Is it permissible by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, for a Manufacturer of air-cooled
heat exchangers, holding a Certification of Authorization, to send fabricated box headers to another
location (shop or field site), that does not hold a Certificate of Authorization, to install tubes in the box
header using a non-welded method of installation, if the controls for such activity are stated in the
Manufacturer’s Quality Control Manual?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, to allow the completed air-
cooled heat exchanger to be hydrostatically tested at a location (shop or field site) that does not hold a
Certificate of Authorization?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it permissible by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, for the Manufacturer to apply
the Code Stamp to the completed air-cooled heat exchanger at a location (shop or field site) that does not
hold a Certificate of Authorization, if the controls for such activity are stated in the Manufacturer’s
Quality Control Manual?
Reply (3): No. See UG-117(b) and Interpretation VIII-l-95-127R.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UCS-56
File: BC02-2819
Question: Is there a maximum holding temperature limit when postweld heat treating in accordance
with UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No; also see UCS-85
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); Use of Metric Equivalents
File: BC02-3289
Question: Is it allowed to use the stated metric conversions for Code limits; e.g., limits expressed as
¼ in. (6 mm), in place of the U.S. Customary values?
Reply: No, see SI Units in Section VIII, Division 1.
File: BC03-179
Question: A nameplate with required markings is attached to a pressure vessel. Is it permissible by

the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 for a Manufacturer to place additional information, such as a
supplier’s name and/or logo to the left of the Code required markings but below the Code U stamp
provided the required marking arrangement is substantially as shown in Fig. UG-118?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC03-198
Question (1): Is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 that a single, unique
pressure vessel be constructed under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 that a single unique
pressure vessel be constructed under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2) if the pressure vessel is similar to a
Manufacturer’s standard product?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that pressure vessels constructed
under the provisions of UG-90(c)(2) be limited in size?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); U-1(g), U-l(c)(1), and UG-125(b)
File: BC03-175
Question (1): An economizer that is constructed according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 is
subjected to the combustion gas turbine exhaust stream of a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG)
constructed according to the rules of Section 1. The HRSG contains an auxiliary burner in combination
with the combustion gas exhaust stream. Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to
consider the economizer as an Unfired Pressure Vessel?
Reply (1): Yes, see also U-l(c)(1).

Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1
to select the capacity of the safety relief valve per the requirements of UG-125(b)?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC03-176
Question: A vessel with an inside diameter over 36 in. (914 mm) is constructed using stainless steel
and specified with zero internal corrosion allowance, but has been designated for use in corrosive service.
Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the vessel have a manhole per UG-46(f)(3)?
Reply: Yes. Use in corrosive service should be noted in the Remarks section of the
Manufacturer’s Data Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-11 and UG-120(c)
File: BC03-458
Question: UG-11 and UG-120(c) of Section VIII, Division 1 allow for Manufacturers with multiple
locations, each with its own Certification of Authorization, to transfer pressure vessel parts between
locations without Partial Data Reports. Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that each
location have the same Authorized Inspection Agency?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division I (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UW-11(a)(5)(b), UW-l2, and
UG-116
File: BC03-454
Question (1): A pressure vessel is constructed according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 using
ERW pipe for the shell and seamless plate for the elliptical heads, which are welded to the shell with a
Type No. 1 weld per Table UW-12. All categories B and C butt welds are radiographed per UW-
11(a)(5)(b). Is it required by UG-116(e) that the vessel be marked RT-2?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When calculating the head thickness of the pressure vessel described in Question (1), per
UG-32, is it permissible to use a value of E=1.00?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the head is seamless or all category A welds in the head are fully
radiographed.
Question (3): When calculating the shell thickness of the pressure vessel described in Question (1), per
UG-27, is it permissible to use a value of E=1.00?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-101(l) and UG-101(o)
File: BC03-l035
Question: May the MAWP of a vessel or vessel part constructed of materials that do not exhibit the
type of yield behavior indicated by a “sharp-kneed” portion of the stress-strain diagram (e.g., austenitic
stainless steel), be determined by proof tests based on either para. UG-101(1) or UG-101(o) of Section
VIII, Division 1, when both test methods require the materials of construction to have a definitely
determinable yield point?
Reply: No.
File: BC03-659
Question: Do the requirements of UG-93(a)(1) in Section VIII, Division 1 also apply to “sheet” and
“strip” material?
Reply: Yes, see footnote 2 in UG-5.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); Appendices 1 and 2
File: BC03-516
Question: A conical reducer (either concentric or eccentric) has a body flange attached directly to
its end. Do the requirements of paras. 1-5 and 1-8 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply for such construction
regarding how to satisfy the reinforcement requirements of para. 1-5 for internal pressure and/or para. 1-8
File: BC02-3288
Question: In Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1, Type No. (6) joint limitations are given
relative to the required thickness of the components being joined whereas in the remainder of Table UW-
12 reference is made only to thickness or normal thickness. Are the thickness limits for Type No. (6)
welds based on the thickness required for pressure only?
Reply: No, all loads must be considered. See Appendix 3, 3-2.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-32(d) and Appendix 1, 1-4
File: BC03-6l9
Question (1): When designing an ellipsoidal head with a head depth to diameter ratio different than
one-fourth, must the provisions of 1-4(c) be satisfied?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When designing a torispherical head with dimensions different than described by either
UG-32(d) or UG-32(e), must the provisions of 1-4(d) be satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes.
Volume 54 Starts Here
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-37(a), Welding
Requirements
File: BC02-4117
Question: In meeting the requirements of UW-37(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, is it prohibited to
prepare and begin applying weld metal from the reverse side of a double-welded joint before completion
of the application of weld metal from the opposite side of the joint?
Reply: No.
File: BC02-4118
Question: Are the requirements of T-140(b)(l) of Section V required to satisfy the requirements of
Appendix 8, para. 8-1 of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-36(c)(3)
File: BC02-2796
Question: If an opening in a formed head meets all the provisions of para. UG-36(c)(3) of Section
VIII, Division 1, but the diameter of the finished opening is greater than ½ of the head inside diameter, is
this opening exempt from the reinforcement calculations of para. UG-37?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-37, UG-40(a), and UG-40(b)
File: BC03-99l
Question: A nozzle is located in a dished head (torispherical or ellipsoidal) such that the limits of
reinforcement, as defined in UG-40(b), extend into the adjacent cylindrical shell section. Is it allowed to
consider the excess thickness of the cylindrical shell, within the limits of reinforcement, as available area
in the nozzle reinforcement calculations required by UG-37?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (d)
File: BC03-1206
Question: For construction using Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (d), does Section VIII, Division 1 provide
any requirements that would define the size of the allowed gap for the fit-up between the shell and
unstayed flat head?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UW-11(a)(5)(b) and UW-42(b)(2)
File: BC03-455
Question: Do the required examination of weld metal buildup in UW-42(d)(2) of Section VIII,
Division 1 apply to the completed surface of the weld buildup when multiple layers or passes are
employed?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC03-933
Question: Do the fabrication requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 (e.g. weld alignment
tolerances specified in UW-33) apply to a circumferential joint between two support skirt sections?
Reply: No, since this weld joint is considered to be outside the mandatory scope of the Code. See
U-1(e)(2).
File: BC03-1347
Question: Is it required by Section VIII, Division 1 that the hub thickness of an integral welding
neck flange shall satisfy the minimum thickness requirements of UG-27?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); Appendix DD, Item 2, U Code
Symbol Stamp, Point 4; UG-117(c)
File: BC03-149l
Question: Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that a Manufacturer may carry out
complete fabrication of a pressure vessel at the field site(s) for which the valid Certificate of
Authorization applies?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); U-1(j)
File: BCO3-1192
Question: Do the volume and pressure limitations listed in U-1(j) apply to each chamber of multi-
chambered vessels that are rated and operated independently?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); UG-11(a) and Appendix 24
File: BC01-279
Question: Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that clamp connections that comply
with a Manufacturer’s standard per the requirements of para. UG-11(a) satisfy the requirements of
Appendix 24, including paras. 24-1(f) and 24-2(e) regarding the inclusion of a bolt retainer and the
minimum size of the bolts and nuts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-16(d)(1) and Fig. UW-16.1
[sketches (y-2) and (z-2)]
File: BC03-1585
Question: For openings of the type depicted by Fig. UW- 16.1 [sketches (y-2) and (z-2)] of Section
VIII, Division 1, may separate reinforcing elements be used when additional reinforcement is required if
the requirements of para. UW-16(d)(1) are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC03-1789
Question: Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for a full-bore, free-flow check
valve to be installed between a rupture disk and its point of discharge?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-11(a)(5), UG-27(c)(2), and
Appendix W
File: BC03-1657
Question (1): A vessel consists of welded shell sections and seamless ellipsoidal heads at each end. The
longitudinal and girth seams are all Type 1. The longitudinal seams (Category A) have been fully
examined per UW-11(a)(5), and the circumferential seams (Category B) have been spot examined per
UW-11(a)(5)(b). Is the joint efficiency to be used for the longitudinal stress (circumferential joint)
calculation per UG-27(c)(2) to be taken from Column B or Column C of Table UW-12?
Reply (1): Column C, since the spot X-ray taken on the Category B seam was to satisfy UW-12(d)
and permit designing the shell and seamless heads with a joint efficiency from Column A of Table UW-
12. Based on the last sentence of UW-11(a)(5)(b), this spot X-ray cannot be used to also satisfy UW-
11(b).
Question (2): For the case described in Question (1), is the joint efficiency to be reported on the
Manufacturer’s Data Report under the section “Circum. Joint (Cat. A, B, & C)” equal to 0.70?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-46, Inspection Openings
File: BC03-1295
Question: Are inspection openings required, per UG-46 of Section VIII, Division 1, in pressure
vessels equipped with a heavy duty rubber bladder, which is intended to prevent water from coming in
contact with the steel vessel when these pressure vessels are designed for non-corrosive service and are
charged with air, which has had moisture removed per UG-46(a)?
Reply: No, provided non-corrosive service has been specified by the user or his designated agent
[see UG-25(a)], and the Manufacturer’s Data Report includes the statement “for non-corrosive service”
under remarks [see UG-46(a)(4)].
File: BC03-13l9
Question: Paragraph UG-23(d) allows the general primary membrane stress to exceed the maximum
allowable stress permitted by UG-23(a), (b), or (c) by 1.2 when considering wind or earthquake loads.
May the 1.2 factor be used in the design calculations required by Part UHX for tubesheet design and
Appendix 2 for flange design?
Reply: No. There are no provisions in Part UHX or Appendix 2 that require determination of
general primary membrane stress, thus the provision for increased allowable stresses in UG-23(d) for
wind and earthquake loading is not applicable.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UNF-56 and UW-40(a),
Postweld Heat Treatment of UNS N08811 (Alloy 800HT) Materials
File: BC03-1320
Question (1): A vessel is constructed of 304H and UNS N08811 (Alloy 800HT) materials at design
temperatures exceeding 1000F (540C) for both materials. In meeting the requirements of UNF-56(e)(1) of
Section VIII, Division 1, do the welded joints connecting the 304H and UNS N08811 materials require
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May the postweld heat treatment of the welded joints described in Question (1) be
conducted by heating local areas as opposed to heating the entire vessel in an enclosed furnace?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the applicable requirements of UW-40(a) are met.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Appendix 4, 4-3(b), Evaluation
of Relevant Indications
File: BC03-1647
Question: If an indication due to size is determined not to be relevant in accordance with Appendix
4, 4-3(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, may it be excluded from further review when found in grouped or
clustered indications?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX, Figs. UHX-11.2 and
UHX-11.3
File: BC03-1648
Question: May the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 be used when
( )* is less than 0.1 or greater than 0.6?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(g)
File: BC03-915
Question: A hot water supply storage tank is heated indirectly with an internal heat exchange coil
taking input hot water from multiple boilers. The heat output of the internal heat exchange coil is rated to
a maximum of 200,000 Btu/hr. Per U-1(c)(2)(g), is it required that the hot water supply storage tank be
constructed and marked according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No, so long as the combined input to the hot water supply storage tank is 200,000 Btu/hr
or less, and the other conditions stated in U-1(c)(2)(g) are satisfied.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-51(a)(2), Certification of
NDE Examiners
File: BC03-1021
Question (1): A Level III Examiner is qualified to an earlier edition of the Code that allowed
certification without examination based on education, experience, and training and has maintained
certification based on continued satisfactory performance. Does this person meet the qualification and
certification requirements of the current UW-51(a)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): Yes, provided they are in accordance with the employer’s written practice.
Question (2): May the Level III Examiner described in Question (1) provide subcontracted services to a
manufacturer applying for an ASME Certificate of Authorization to the present Code Edition and
Addenda?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the qualification and certification requirements are in accordance with the
employer’s written practice and is described in the Manufacturer’s Quality Control System.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-37(a), Welding
Requirements
File: BC03-1492
Question: In meeting the requirements of UW-37(a) of Section VIII, Division 1, is it prohibited to

simultaneously apply weld metal to both sides of the joint?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX, UHX-11.3,
Nomenclature
File: BC03-1825
Question: Must the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 be used when
the center-to-center distance between adjacent tube rows exceeds four times the tube pitch?
Vol 55 Starts Here:
Subject: UG-29(c), External Pressure (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC03-1845
Question: A pressure vessel is subjected to external pressure and utilizes internal stiffening rings
that satisfy all the provisions of paras UG 29(c)(1),(2), (3), and (4). Is it required to provide either the
strut member as shown in Fig UG-29.1 at location “D” or the external stiffener as shown in Fig. UG-29.1
at location “C”?
Reply: No.
Subject: Appendix 1, 1-4(f)(1)(e), Internal Pressure Formed Heads (2001 Edition and 2003
Addenda)
File: BC04-156
Question: In para 1-4(f)(1)(e), shall the equation given for Re, be used for all values of ?
Reply: Yes, only the value of c is dependent on value of .
Subject: UG-136(c)(5)( Note) and UG-130, Pressure Relief Valve Machining (2001 Edition and
2003 Addenda)
File: BC03-1329
Question (1): Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII. Division I for a Manufacturer of pressure
relief valves, as defined in the note under UG-l36(c)(5), to subcontract the machining of component parts
to another organization which does not possess a Certificate of Authorization, provided the Manufacturer
retains responsibility for all activities listed in the note?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the requirement of UG-136(c)(1) is met.
Question (2): Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for the subcontracted organization
which machines the component parts to loosely fit together the parts solely for the purpose of shipping to
the Manufacturer in possession of the Certification of Authorization?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the requirement of UG-136(c)(1) is met.
Question (3): If a Manufacturer who is in possession of a valid Certificate of Authorization receives

parts, which have been loosely fit together solely for the purpose of shipping, is it required that the parts
be separated prior to final assembly by the Certificate Holder so that the requirements of UG-130 are
met?
Reply (3): Yes, provided the valve type is capacity-certified in accordance with the requirements of
Section VIII. Division I.
Subject: UG-22(g), Load Impact (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC04-324
Question: Paragraph UG-22(g) states that “impact reactions such as those due to fluid shock” shall
be considered in the design of a vessel. Does this include the loads resulting from abrupt changes in fluid
motion or direction that is typically referred to as ‘‘water hammer” or “steam slugging”?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UHX-l3.3 and UHX-l4.3, Nomenclature; UHX-l0(a), Conditions of Applicability (2001
Edition and 2003 Addenda)
Date Issued: March 23. 2004
File: BC04-043
Question (1): In Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1, is the rim the unperforated portion of the
tubesheet from the equivalent diameter of outer tube limit circle, Do, to the outside diameter of the
tubesheet, A?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX be used for a tubesheet that is not circular?
Reply (2): No. See UHX-10(a) and U-2(g).
Question (3): May the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX be used for a tubesheet that is uniformly
perforated in either an equilateral triangular or square pattern within a rectangular area?
Reply (3): No. See UHX-l0(a) and U-2(g).
Subject: UG-22(i), Loads. Abnormal Pressure (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC04-325
Question (1): Does para. UG-22(i) require that abnormal pressures resulting from internal deflagrations
or detonations he considered in the design of a pressure vessel if such events are specified by the user?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the response to Question 1 is “yes,” does Section VIII, Division 1 define acceptance
criteria for internal deflagrations and detonations?
Reply (2): Section VIII, Division 1, Nonmandatory Appendix H provides guidance to accommodate
loadings produced by internal deflagrations. There are no rules in Section VIII, Division 1 that would
provide guidance regarding loadings resulting from internal detonations. See U-2(g).
Subject: UG-34(c)(l) and UG-44, Pressure-Temperature Ratings of Standard Blind Flanges (2001
Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC03-623
Question (1): May a raised-face blind flange, conforming to a flange standard referenced in UG-
34(c)(1), be used at the pressure-temperature ratings in the respective standards, without additional design
calculations, if they are altered in such a manner that their final dimensions fall outside the tolerances of
the respective standard?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May a raised-face blind flange, conforming to a flange standard referenced in UG-
34(c)(1) and having a corrosion-resistant overlay welded to its interior face in such a manner that the final
dimensions of the base material comply with the respective standard, be used at the pressure-temperature
ratings in the respective standards, without additional design calculations?
Reply (2): Yes
Subject: U-l(g)(3) and U-l(j), Steam Generator (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC03-775
Question (1): A pressure vessel with an operating pressure of 15 psi is constructed for the purpose of
generating steam which is to be vented to a room at atmospheric pressure for the purpose of heating the
room. Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the vessel be considered within the Scope
of the Code in accordance with U-1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the vessel described in Question 1 is constructed in accordance with the rules of
Section VIII, Division 1 and the ASME Code Symbol is affixed to the vessel, is it required that the vessel
be considered an unfired steam boiler per U-1(g)?
Reply (2): Yes
Subject: UG-118, Methods of Marking (2001 Edition and 2002 Addenda.)
Fife: BC03-777
Question: Paragraph UG-118 of Section VIII, Division 1, requires markings including the ASME
Code Symbol, per para. UG-116, to be stamped directly on the vessel or on a separate nameplate. May a
Certificate Holder apply the required markings in UG-116 on the external surfaces of a vessel, except for
the Code Symbol, by a programmable pin marking system which meets the requirements of UG-118(b)
and (c)?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: VIll-1-04-33
Subject: U-1(c)(2)(c) (Section VIII, Division I) and AG- 121(c) (Section VIII. Division 2), Pulp
Refiners (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC03-1277
Question: Is a pressurized pulp refiner exempt from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 by U-
l(c)(2)(c) and Section VIII, Division 2 by AG- 121(c), provided the primary design considerations and/or
stresses are derived from the functional requirements of the device?
Reply: Yes. See U-1(c)(l) and Footnote 1 to AG-100.

Subject: UHA-51(a)(4)(a)(3), Impact Testing Specimens (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
Date issued: April 7, 2004
File: BC04-056
Question: When evaluating lateral expansion test results for high alloy materials per UHA-51, are
there any provisions to reduce the required lateral expansion opposite the notch for subsized specimens?
Reply: No. The required lateral expansion opposite the notch specified in UHA-51 applies to
both full-size and subsize specimens.
Subject: UG-43(d) and Fig. UG-40(a-2). Attachment of Nozzles (2001 Edition and 2003
Addenda)
File: BC04-685
Question: Paragraph UG-43(d) specifies a requirement that drilled holes to be tapped shall not
penetrate to within one-fourth of the corroded wall thickness from the inside surface of the vessel. Is the
wall thickness referred to in this paragraph the same as the value “t” shown in Fig. UG-40?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-120(c). Partial Data Report Forms (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
File: BC04-231
Question (1): Is a Partial Data Report required, per UG-120(c), when a seamless head is supplied per
the rules of UG-11(b)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that a Manufacturer may obtain a
Partial Data Report for seamless heads supplied by another Manufacturer, under the rules of UG- 11(b)?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the Manufacturer of the head is in possession of a valid Certificate of
Authorization,
Subject: U-l(c)(2)(h). Jacket (2001 Edition and 2003 Addenda)
Date Issued: June 15. 2004
File: RC04-346
Question: Per U-1(c)(2)(h), is a jacket (Type 1 through Type 5 as defined in Appendix 9) within the
scope of the Code when the inner chamber operates at 15 psi or less and the jacket is at full vacuum?
Reply: Yes. See Appendix 9, 9-1(c).
July 2005 Addenda Starts here
Interpretation: Vlll-1-04-38
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-125(c)(2), UG-133(d). UG-135(d)(l), and
Code Case 2211
File: BC01-910
Question (I): Per UG-133(d), is it permissible not to consider internal failure in a heat exchanger as a
cause of overpressure based on an evaluation of the service conditions and heat exchanger mechanical
design?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): In satisfying the provisions of UG-133(d), does Section VIII, Division 1 provide any
requirements regarding the criteria or methods to be used in considering internal failure in a heat
exchanger?
Reply (2): No, it is the user’s or the user’s designated agent’s responsibility to define the criteria or
methods to be used in determining the internal failure scenarios to be considered in the design of the heat
exchanger.
Question (3): For a heat exchanger in which internal failure can occur, must a pressure relief device be
provided on the low pressure side if the maximum operating pressure that results on the low pressure side
does not exceed the test pressure?
Reply (3): Yes; see UG-125(a). It is the user’s or the user’s designated agent’s responsibility to
define the internal failure scenarios to be used in determining the pressure relief capacity requirements for
the heat exchanger.
Question (4): Is it permissible for a vessel designed under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 to
use Code Case 2211 to satisfy some overpressure scenarios, and a pressure relief device for other
overpressure scenarios?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Is it permissible by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to use highly reliable electrical or
electronic instrumentation to meet the requirements of UC-135(d)(l)?
Reply (5): No.
Question (6): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that overpressure protection be
provided for an unexpected source of external heat if engineering analysis shows that the vessel will fail
due to excessive temperature before the pressure relief device(s) would be activated?
Reply (6): Yes.

Subject: Section VIII, Division I (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); Appendix W, Data Report Forms
U-1 and U-1A
File: BC02-2682
Question: Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that information regarding cyclic
and dynamic reactions be included on the Manufacturer’s Data Report?
Reply: No; however, the Manufacturer may include such information in the remarks section of
the Manufacturer’s Data Report.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-126(a)
File: BC04-583
Question: Does a balanced bellows-type valve meet the requirement of ASME Section VIII,
Division 1, UG-126(a) if the valve conforms to the definition for a balanced direct spring-loaded PRV
and includes a bellows, as presented in ASME PTC 25-2001, paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4, respectively, and
exhibits an operating characteristic defined for a safety, safety relief, or relief valve?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX
File: BC04-864
Question (1): May the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 be used when the
inside diameter of the shell, Ds, is different from the inside diameter of the channel, Dc?
Reply (1): Yes; however, Part UHX does not provide guidance regarding the maximum allowed
difference between these diameters. The equations in Part UHX are derived based on the assumption that
the untubed rim acts like a ring (i.e., its cross section does not distort).
Question (2): May the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 be used when the
centerline of the channel is offset from the centerline of the shell?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 and Fig. 2-4
File: BC04-1015
Question (1): Are the flanges depicted in Fig. UW- 13.2(m) and (n) of Section VIII, Division 1
considered to be integral flanges as defined in paragraph 2-4(a)(2)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May the flanges shown in Fig. UW-13.2(m) and (n) be considered to be an “optional”
flange and calculated as a “loose” flange if the limitations as defined in paragraph 2-4(a)(3) are satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If the flanges shown in Fig UW-13.2(m) and (n) are considered to be an “optional” flange
and calculated as a “loose” flange, must the dimensions shown in Fig UW-l3.2(m) and (n) be satisfied?
Rep!y (3): Yes.
Question (4): In determining the weld size requirements for a tubesheet with bolting flange as given in
Fig. UW-13.2(h) through (l), is there any consideration given to “optional” versus “integral” flanges as
presented in paragraph 2.4?
Reply (4): No.
File: BC04-l043
Question (1): With reference to Interpretation VIII-1-95-128, are the welds used to attach heater
elements to flat covers in flanged immersion heaters classified by UW-3 as a Category A, B, C, or D
joint?
Rep!y (1): No.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is no, then may a fillet weld be used to attach a heater
element to a flat cover in a flanged immersion heater intended for lethal service as defined in UW-2(a)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX, UG-34, UG-47, UW-
13, and Appendix A
File: BC04-472
Question (1): A fixed tubesheet shell-and-tube heat exchanger, meeting the description in UHX-3.2 and
meeting all the scope requirements in Part UHX, transfers heat between a fluid in the shell and a fluid in
the tubes through the wall of the tubes such that there is an axial differential thermal expansion between
the shell and tubes. May the rules for the design of braced and stayed surfaces in UG-47 of Section VIII,
Division I be used in lieu of the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX for the fixed tubesheet heat exchanger
described above?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): May the rules for the design and attachment of unstayed flat heads and covers in UG-34
of Section VIII, Division 1 be used for tubesheets that meet the requirements of Part UHX?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Shall the requirements for the attachment details in UW-13(e) or UW-13(f) of Section
VIII, Division 1 be used for integral tubesheets that meet the requirements of Part UHX?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): May the rules for tube-to-tubesheet joints in Nonmandatory Appendix A of Section VIII,
Division 1 be used for shell-and-tube heat exchangers that meet the requirements of Part UHX?
Reply (4): Yes; see UHX-15.2(b).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-20, UG-99, and UCS-66(a),
Hydrostatic Test Pressure
File: BC04-1070
Question: Must the hydrostatic test be considered when establishing the minimum design metal
temperature per UG-20(b)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition. 2003 Addenda); Fig. UW-13.2 and Table UW-12
File: BC04- 1113
Question (1): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for welded joints as per Fig. UW-
13.2, sketches (m) and (n) to be examined by full radiography or spot radiography when the vessel in
which these corner joints are included is subject to the full radiography requirements of UW-11?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Are the Category C joints as shown in Fig. UW-l3.2, sketches (m) and (n) to be
considered as Type 7 from Table UW-12?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition. 2003 Addenda); U-1 (c)(2)(e)
File: BC04-l 115
Question: Is a pressure vessel intended for storage or processing of a fluid, built from piping
components, exempt from the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 per U-1(c)(2)(e), if none of the other
exemptions listed in U-1(c)(2) apply?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: VIII-1 -04-48

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-2(a), UW-3(b), and Table
UW-12
Date issued: January 13. 2005
File: BC04-1205
Background: Consider a vessel, constructed according to the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, containing
a cone with a half-apex angle exceeding 30 deg. The cone is attached to a cylindrical shell at its large end
and a nozzle at its small end. Both ends are full penetration welds and neither contains knuckle
transitions.
Question (1): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 for the welds on both sides of the
cone to he considered Category B?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it required that these welds by considered as Type 8 per Table UW-12?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Is it permitted for these joints to be used in a vessel which has been designated for lethal
service as per UW-2(a)?
Reply (3): No.
Interpretation: VIlI-1-04-49
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda): UG-130 and Form UV-1
File: BC04-1276
Question: When Form UV-1 is completed in accordance with UG-130 by a UV Certificate Holder
whose scope is limited to assembly of pressure relief valves, may the responsible representative sign the
Certificate of Shop Compliance with the understanding that the original parts fabricated by the
Certificate-holding valve Manufacturer met the applicable rules for design, material, and construction?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition. 2003 Addenda); UG-129(e)
File: BC04-l369
Question: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-129(e)(9) arid (10) provide mandatory requirements for
marking of rupture disks used on pressure vessels constructed to the requirements of Section VIII,
Division 1, Is it required that a rupture disk be marked in accordance with UG-129(e) for use on a
pressure vessel that has been constructed to the latest edition of the Code?
Reply: Yes,
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Appendix 13, Design of Vessels
of Noncircular Cross Section Subject to External Pressure (Full Vacuum)
Date Issued: January 14. 2005
File: BC04-1500
Question: Does Appendix 13 of Section VIII. Division 1 provide external pressure design rules for
stayed noncircular vessels similar to those shown in Fig. 13-2(a), sketches (7), (8), (9), arid (10)?
Reply: No; see 13-4(e).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX. UHX-I0, Internally
Spherical-Shaped Channels
File: BC05-005
Question: Do the rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to the design of tubesheets
integral with channels that do not have a uniform cylindrical shape and thickness for a minimum length of
1.8Sqrt(Dctc) adjacent to the tubesheet?
Reply: No; see U-2(g).

Interpretation: VIlI-1-04-53
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Part UHX. UHX-10, Tubesheets
With Flexible Rims
File: BC05-006
Question: Since the equations in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 are derived based on the
assumption that the untubed rim (unperforated annular region between the shell and tubes) acts like a ring
(i.e., its cross section does not distort), may alternative tubesheet design rules be used For tubesheets
having flexible untubed rims (i.e., the cross section does distort)?
Reply: Yes; see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UHX-14, Internally Sealed Floating Tubesheet
File: BC05-075
Question: A floating tubesheet heat exchanger with the arrangement shown in Fig. UHX-14.1(c)
has an internally sealed floating tubesheet [Fig. UHX- I 4.3(d)] that is required to be much thicker than
the stationary tubesheet (Fig. UHX-14.2) to accommodate the packing, lantern ring, and tube layout. Does
this geometry fall within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1, Part UHX?
Reply: No; see UHX-14.2 and U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UHX-4(e)(1), UHX-l3.4(e)(1), UHX-14.4(f),

UHX-15, and Appendix A, Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint Loads
Date Issued: February 23. 2005
File: BC05-092
Question (1): UHX-4(e)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 establishes the allowable axial tube stress. When
complying with the requirements of UHX-13.4(e)(1) and UHX-14.4(f), is it required to perform a shear
load test in accordance with A-3 and A-4 to establish the allowable tube-to-tubesheet joint load?
Reply (1): No; see UHX-15, A-2, and U-2(g).
Question (2): Does Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 contain rules to determine the stresses in the
tubesheet, shell, tubes, and tube-to-tubesheet joints when test ring devices are used during hydrostatic
test?
Question (3): May the rules for tube-to-tubesheet joints in Nonmandatory Appendix A of Section VIII,
Division 1 be used for floating tubesheet heat exchangers?
Reply (3): Yes; see UHX-15.2(b) and A-l(a).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition): UW-40(f) and Appendix A, Fig .A-2. PWHT
Tube-to-Tubesheet Welds
File: BC05-093
Question: When applying the postweld heat treatment rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to tube-to-
tubesheet welds shown in Fig. A-2, the thickness of the fillet weld, groove weld, and combined groove
and fillet weld is defined in UW-40(f)(2) and (f)(3). For welds of other shapes shown in Fig. A-2, should
weld dimension a be used to comply with UW-40(f)(5)(g)?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC04-1634
Question (1): In accordance with the rules of Section VIII. Division 1, is it permissible to include weld
metal build-up as available area of reinforcement, as required in UG-37, for a forged integrally reinforced
nozzle neck if the provisions of UG-42 are satisfied?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is “Yes,” may the F factor presented in Fig. UG-37 be used in
the nozzle reinforcement calculations?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Paragraph UG-37 sets limits for nozzle reinforcement as a function of the thicknesses of
the shell, nozzle, and reinforcing pad (element). For a nozzle with a configuration similar to that of Fig.
UW-l6.1(g), is the reinforcement limit 2.5tn + te in Fig. UG-37.1 to be determined using tn equal to the
thicker (shoulder) portion of the nozzle neck?
Reply (3): See Fig. UG-40, sketches (e), (e-1), and (e-2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2001 Edition. 2003 Addenda): UHX-13.4(a) and UHX-14.4(b),
Operating Pressure and Differential Thermal Expansion
File: BC05-007
Question: UHX-13.4(a) and UHX-14.4(b) state it is necessary to evaluate all the anticipated loading
conditions to ensure that the worst load combination has been considered in the design. Load Cases 4, 5,
6, and 7 include the effect of pressure and differential thermal expansion. When tubesheets are designed
in accordance with Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1, does the use of the coincident operating
pressure(s) and the differential thermal expansion corresponding to each of these load cases meet the
requirement for considering the worst load combination?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Appendix W, Form U-1A
File: BC05-078
Question: Is it permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 to include in the Remarks section
of Form U-1, U-1A, U-2, or U-2A a note stating that material used on a vessel also meets requirements of
a different specification, noting any limitations, provided the material used for construction is permitted?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); U-1 and UG-22
File: BC05-103
Question: Does the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 include pressure vessels mounted and
operated on a floating ship?
Reply: Yes; see U-1(c)(1).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UHX-10(a) and UHX-14
File: BC05-411
Question: Do tubesheets for shell-and-tube heat exchangers having a no-tubes-in-window (NTIW)

baffle design fall within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1 Part UHX?
Reply: No; see UHX-10(a) and U-2(g).

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; UG-34 and UG-36(c)(3)
File: BC04-517
Question (1): In UG-34(d). Sketches (e), (f), and (g) of Section VIII, Division 1, may an opening
meeting all of the requirements of UG-36(c) and UG-37 be placed in the shell within a 2Sqrt(dts) distance
from a flat head for values of m less than 1?
Reply (1): The Code does not address this issue; see U-2(g).
Question (2): May the rules in UG-34 of Section VIII, Division 1 be used to design flat heads with
multiple head-to-shell attachment details on the same head?
Vol 56 2006 addenda Starts Here
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-47 and Appendix 17
File: BC0I-777
Question: Is it the intent that the exemption from 5/16 in. (8 mm) minimum thickness in UG-47(b)
for dimpled or embossed assemblies constructed under UW-19 also apply to those assemblies constructed
under Appendix 17?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UW-19(c)(2)
File: BC02-4114
Question: Is it the intent of UW-19(c)(2) that a 0.80 joint efficiency be used when calculating the
maximum allowable working pressure per UG-101(m)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-3(a), Spiral Welds
File: BC03-1082
Question (1): Is it the intent that a spiral-welded butt joint be considered a Category A welded joint?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it permissible to use spiral welded shell sections made of plate material if all the
applicable provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 are satisfied?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-42(a)(2), UG-42(c)
File: BC03-1098
Question: UG-42(a)(2) and UG-42(c) make reference to Appendix 1-7(a) and 1-7(c); however, 1-7
is entitled "Large Openings in Cylindrical Shells." Is it the intent that openings in heads are required to
satisfy the provisions of 1-7(a) and (c) as referenced in UG-42(a)(2) and UG-42(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-27 and Appendix A
File: BC03-1634
Question (1): Is it required that the straight section of a flange hub where it attaches to the shell, as
shown in Fig. 2-4, sketch (6a) of Appendix 2, meet the requirements of UG-27?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it required that the straight section of a flange hub constructed to UG-44 meet the
requirements of UG-27?
Reply (2): No.
File: BC03-1826
Question (1): A shell-and-tube heat exchanger utilizes tubes that fall under the scope and other
provisions of Appendix 23 of Section VIII, Division I. As permitted by UG-20(a), the tubes in the heat
exchanger are designed based on the maximum mean metal temperature (taken through the tube wall at
any point in the bundle and not along the tube length) that is expected under operating conditions. Is it the
intent of the Code that the Appendix 23 rules can be applied if the heat exchanger is operated such that
the tube design temperature so determined is within the maximum limits of the Appendix, but is less than
the greater of the design temperatures of the shell side and tube side?
Reply (1): Yes, provided either the shell side or tube side maximum design temperature does not
exceed the tube design temperature.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is yes, shall the tube design temperature as described above be
shown separately on the Manufacturer's Data Report and vessel nameplate?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC03-1903
Question: Is it the intent of para. UG-16(b)(2) that pipes or tubes, not greater than NPS 6 (DN I50)
may be considered exempt from the minimum thickness requirements of UG-16(b) if they are fully
enclosed and protected by a shell, casing, or duct?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Appendix M, M-5.8
File: BC04-1260
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix M, M-5.8 to allow stop valves
installed for isolation of a pressure relief device, for maintenance of the device, not to comply with the
requirements of M-5.6 if fire is the only source of overpressure?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Part UHX, UHX-10, Tubesheets with Welded
Stiffening Elements
File: BC05-271
Question: Are the tubesheet design rules in Part UHX of Section VIII, Division 1 applicable when
the effect of stiffening elements welded to the tubesheet are considered in the tubesheet design?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UW -16
File: BC05-560
Question: Do para. UW-16 and Fig. UW-16.1 prohibit nozzle attachment welds that are larger than
the minimum size given in Fig. UW -16.1 but also are larger than shown on the manufacturer's drawing
and WPS?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Table UCS-56
File: BC05-032
Question (1): A pressure vessel is constructed of P-No. 3, Group 1 and 2 materials with a nominal
thickness not exceeding 5/8 in. (16 mm). A satisfactory welding procedure qualification in accordance
with UCS-56(a) has been made in equal or greater thickness than the production weld. The vessel is not in
lethal service, nor is postweld heat treatment a service requirement. All other requirements of UCS-56(a)
have been met. Is postweld heat treatment required per Table UCS-56 of Section VIII, Division 1 for this
vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the vessel described in Question (1), is it required to preheat to a minimum
temperature of 200°F (95°C)?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UHX-13.2
File: BC05-459
Question: The conditions of applicability stated in UHX-13.2 of Section VIII, Division 1 require
that both tubesheets of a fixed tube sheet heat exchanger have the same edge conditions. If the two tube
sheets have different diameters, are they considered to have the same edge condition?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UCS-67
File: BC05-563
Question: The hub of a forged tubesheet is to be welded to a shell plate. The plate material is
exempt from impact testing, but the forged tubesheet is not exempt. Do UCS-67(a)(1) and UCS-67(c)(1)
require that the weld between the hub of the forged tube sheet and the shell be qualified with impact tests
on the weld and the weld heat affected zone (HAZ) of the forged tubesheet?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UG-27 and UW-l3.3
File: BC05-565
Question: A heat exchanger is manufactured with a forged tubesheet with a hub that is butt welded
to the shell as shown in Fig. UW-13.3. Shall the thickness requirements of UG-27, using the maximum
allowable stress for the hub material, be satisfied at all points along the hub?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); Use of EN-473 for Certification
of NDE Examiners
File: BC04-626
Question: May a Manufacturer apply the knowledge, testing, and skills demonstrations performed
under the auspices of EN-473 for certification of NDE examiners in fabricating pressure vessels to ASME
Code Section VIII, Divisions 1, 2, and 3?
.
Reply: Yes, provided that:
(a) the Manufacturer has a written practice describing the use of EN-473 know ledge
examinations and skills demonstrations to meet the guidelines of SNT-TC-lA (current
Code accepted edition);
(b) the training, experience, and demonstration requirements of the written practice meet
the guidelines of SNT-TC-1A; and
(c) the Manufacturer retains written certification of NDE personnel to be compliant with
the guidelines of SNT-TC-1A.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UW-16 and U-l(e)(1)
File: BC05-463
Consider a pressure vessel constructed according to the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 in which
a coil passes through either the head or the shell of the pressure vessel to heat or cool the contents of the
pressure vessel. The coil is attached to the pressure vessel by a weld that meets the requirements of UW-
16.
Question (1): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division I that this coil be constructed as a part
of the pressure vessel?
Reply (1): Yes, up to the geometric limits described in U-1(e)(1).
Question (2): Must the pressure vessel be documented on a U-1 Manufacturer's Data report as a single
chamber pressure vessel?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC05-623
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 have rules for the weld joints of multisegmental
reinforcing elements?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Form U-2A
File: BC05-672
Question: A Manufacturer of pressure vessels orders 2:1 ellipsoidal heads from a Parts
Manufacturer in possession of a valid Certificate of Authorization. The Parts Manufacturer provides a
form U-2A Partial Data Report. Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the Parts
Manufacturer include the elliptical ratio on the Form U-2A?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UHX-10, General Conditions of Applicability
File: BC05-1101
Question: Do tubesheets containing different sized tubes fall within the scope of Section VIII,
Division 1, Part UHX?
Reply: No; see UHX-10(a) and U-2(g).
File: BC05-1270
Question (1): The rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, UG-125 permit multiple relief devices to be
installed. Is it permitted that both a pressure relief valve and a nonreclosing pressure relief device such as
a rupture disk may be installed separately rather than in accordance with UG-132?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is yes, is it permitted for the rupture disk to be stamped at
105% of the vessel's MAWP and at the vessel's design temperature?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the other pressure relief device is set at MAWP or lower.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-42(a) and Fig. UG-42(a),
UG-40 and Fig. UG-40 (a-1) and (a-2)
File: BC04-84l
Question (l): A vessel has two openings where the limit of reinforcement measured parallel to the
vessel wall, "R + tn + t" for both openings is greater than the diameter of each opening. Therefore the
distance "R + tn + t" is the controlling limit of reinforcement. The nozzles are spaced at a distance greater
than two times their average diameter, but the spacing is less than the sum of their limits of reinforcement
and consequently the limits of reinforcement overlap. Is it the intent of UG-42(a) and Fig. UG-42 to
restrict the limits of reinforcement so that no portion of the cross section can be considered as applying to
more than one opening, even if the spacing is greater than two times their average diameter?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): With reference to UG-40 and Fig. UG-40 (a-1) and Fig. UG-40(a-2), is it permissible to
ignore the area of tapped holes falling within the boundary limits in reinforcement calculations for
studded connections?
Reply (2): No.
Volume 57 starts here
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-116 - Required Marking for External
Pressure
File: BC02-4219
Question (1): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the external maximum
allowable working pressure of a vessel be marked on the pressure vessel and on the data report when not
specified as a design condition by the user or his designated agent?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is it the intent that when specified by a user to design and stamp a vessel with external
maximum allowable working pressure, this value be entered in the Manufacturer’s Data Report U-1A?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (3): If a Manufacturer chooses to indicate an external pressure rating of “Full Vacuum” on a
Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel, is it the intent to allow the use of the abbreviation “FV”?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-16(b) and Appendix 17
File: BC03-1476
Question: Is it the intent of paragraph 17-4, in Section VIII, Division 1, to allow the construction
of dimpled or embossed assemblies constructed per Appendix 17 with a plate thickness less than
1/16" (1.6mm) specified in UG-16(b)?
Reply: Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-29(d) & UW-48(b)
File: BC04-1348
Question: Is it the intent in UW-29(d) and UW-48(b) that the Manufacturer either sign the welder
and welding operator performance qualification records, or provide some other method of control, such
as an electronic database, as long as the alternative method is controlled in accordance with the
Manufacturer’s quality system?
Reply: Yes
File: BC05-1566
Question: Consider a shell and tube heat exchanger where only the shell is constructed according to
the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 and to which the Code Symbol Stamp is applied. Is it required that
the tubeside of this combination unit be pressure tested per UG-99(e)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UG-116(a)(1)(b)(4)
File: BC05-1589
Question: Consider a multi-chamber pressure vessel consisting of an inner chamber surrounded by

a jacket, in which the inner chamber is subject to both internal pressure and full vacuum. When the inner
chamber is at full vacuum condition along with additional external pressure applied by the surrounding
jacket, even if this condition does not govern the design of the inner chamber, is it required by the rules
of Section VIII, Division 1 that the external maximum allowable working pressure of the inner chamber
be marked on the nameplate and documented on the Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply: Yes, when it is specified as a design condition.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UG-136(c)(3)(c) – Performance
Requirements of Pressure Relief Valves
File: BC04-1311
Question: Is it the intent of UG-136(c)(3)(c) that a pressure relief valve has failed to meet
performance requirements of Section VIII, Division 1 if it exhibits chattering during operational and
capacity tests, or flutter at the flow-rated pressure in a way that either would interfere with the
measurement of capacity or would result in damage to the valve?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)(i)
File: BC06-95
Question: May vessels as described by Section VIII, Division 1 in U-1(g)(2) and U-1(g)(3), be
exempted by the provisions of U-1(c)(2)(i) when the vessels have an internal diameter of 6 inches or
less?
Reply: Yes, unless construction in accordance with the Code is required by the user or local
jurisdiction.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); Table 2-4 and Table 2-5.1
File: BC05-1667
Question: Do the recommended minimum gasket widths of non-mandatory Table 2-4 of Section
VIII Division 1apply to all the gasket styles shown in Table 2-5.1 except for self energized gaskets and
ring joints.
Reply: Yes.
File: BC06-357
Question: A pressure vessel that has no specified corrosion allowance is made of plate that is
ordered to a thickness equal to the required design thickness. If the actual plate thickness received is less
than the required design thickness, but is within the allowable under-tolerance as given in UG-16(c); may
the plate be used in accordance with the rules of Section VIII Division 1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UG-14 and Code Cases 2155 &
2156
File: BC06-507
Question: Is it permissible to use both Code Cases 2155 and 2156 for a vessel that has a flat head
machined from rod/bar stock and is integral to a shell body as an alternative to UG-14?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda) UG-29 and UG-30
File: BC06-559
Question: Stiffening rings required to resist external pressure are located on the inside of a pressure
vessel. These internal stiffening rings are designed to carry the loads generated by the external pressure,
and fillet welds are used only as a means of holding the rings in place. Do the weld sizing requirements
of UG-30 apply to these fillet welds?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UW-11 and Code Case 2235-6
File: BC04-1455
Question (1): Is it the intent of Code Case 2235-6 (2235-7) that when portions of the vessel meet the
requirements of UW-11(a) for full radiography and portions meet the requirements of Code Case 2235-6
for using ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography, the vessel nameplate be stamped with “RT-1”?
Reply (1): Yes, provided the extent of examination, joint efficiencies, and the Code Case are noted
on the Manufacturer’s Data Report and the nameplate is marked under the Code Symbol stamp by
applying "UT."
Question (2): May a vessel nameplate be stamped “RT-2” per the rules of UG -116 of Section VIII,
Division 1, when a complete vessel satisfies the requirements of UW-11(a)(5) and when the spot
radiography requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) have been applied but when ultrasonic examination in
accordance with the provisions of Code Case 2235-6 has been used in lieu of radiography?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the extent of examination, joint efficiencies, and the Code Case are noted
on the Manufacturer’s Data Report and the nameplate is marked under the Code Symbol stamp by
applying "UT."
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UW-13(c)(2) & Fig. UW-13.1(e)
File: BC04-1456
Question: If an intermediate head is not located at a cylinder to cylinder junction (i.e. a

circumferential weld), and if the fillet weld is sized to carry the shear load as defined in UW-13(c)(2),
may the intermediate head be attached without the butt weld as shown in Fig. UW-13.1(f)?
Reply: No
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Appendix M, M-5.7 - Responsibilities
File: BC05-1136
Question: M-5.3(i) of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix M states that, when a stop valve
between a pressure relief device and the equipment it is protecting is closed, the user shall ensure that the
other system components are acceptable for the potential levels of pressure established in M-5.3(g). Is it
required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 for the user to ensure that other system
components are acceptable for potential levels of pressure if the stop valve(s) is closed when the
measures in M-5.7(b)(3)(b) are implemented?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UW-16(f)(3)(a)
File: BC06-273
Question: May fittings and bolting pads, in accordance with UW-16(f)(3)(a), have an opening in
the shell equal to or less than 4.25 in (pipe OD of 3.5 in + 0.75 in), if that is less than one-half the vessel
inside diameter, without requiring reinforcement per UG-37?
Reply: Yes, See UW-16(f)(3)(a)(2) and UW-16(f)(3)(b)
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UHX-9
File: BC06-423
Question: May the thickness of the tubesheet flanged extension be less than the minimum required
thickness calculated in accordance with UHX-9.5(b) of Section VIII, Division 1, at any point along the
flanged extension?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UG-43(d) & UCS-6(b)(3)
File: BC06-541
Question (1): Is it permitted by paragraph UCS-6(b)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1 to use SA-36
material for a stud pad (studded outlet) with a thickness greater then 5/8" and attached to the shell in
accordance with the requirements of Fig. UG-40 (a-1) or (a-2)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When considering pressure loads only, UG-43(d) requires a studded outlet to meet the
reinforcement requirements of UG-36 through UG-42, limits the distance the stud hole can be to the
inside surface of the vessel, and specifies a minimum stud engagement length per UG-43(g). Does
Section VIII, Division 1 contain rules for designing a studded outlet when subject to external loads such
as shear and/or bending moment?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UW-11(a) and UW-12(d).
File: BC05-1574
Question (1): Per UW-12(d), is E=0.85 to be used for calculating circumferential stress for a seamless
vessel section welded to a flat head using Type 7 weld on one end and a seamless head with a Type 1 or 2
weld on the other end in accordance with Table UW-12 when the spot radiography requirements of UW-
11(a)(5)(b) have not been met?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is E=0.85 to be used when calculating the circumferential stress for a seamless vessel
section welded to flat heads on each end using Type 7 welds in accordance with Table UW-12?
Reply (2): No, E=1.00 provided the seamless vessel section does not have a Category B weld.
Question (3): May E=1.00 be used for circumferential stress calculation for a seamless vessel section
and the thickness of the seamless head when the Category A or B welds connecting the seamless vessels
sections or heads are Type 3, 4, 5, or 6 of Table UW-12 and spot radiography in accordance with UW-
11(a)(5)(b) is met?
Reply (3): No, E=0.85 for Type 3, 4, 5, or 6 welded joints.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UHX-9, 12, 13 and 14
File: BC06-558
Question (1): Do the rules in UHX-9 apply to the extended portion of the tubesheet when it extends
only to the outside diameter of gasket [Configurations c, d (not extended), f and C]?
Question (2): Do the rules in UHX-9 apply to Configuration d (extended) when the tubesheet is bolted
separately to the shell or channel during pressure testing and/or when a bolt load is transmitted from the
shell or channel flange to the extended edge of the tubesheet during operation?
Reply (2): Yes, see UHX-9.4(a).
Question (3): Do the rules in UHX-12, 13 and 14 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to Configuration d
(extended) when a bolt load is transmitted from the shell or channel flange to the extended edge of the
tubesheet during pressure testing and/or operation?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UG-34 - Unstayed Flat Heads
and Covers
File: BC06-667
Question (1): Is it permitted to use "1.5 S", as provided in UG-23(c), in lieu of "S" in the equations of
UG-34 in order to determine the required thickness of flat heads and covers?
Reply (1): No. For those configurations for which it is appropriate to use an allowable stress equal to
1.5S, the 1.5 stress multiplier has been built into the "c" factor.
Question (2): May a finite element analysis be used to determine the required thickness of a flat head or
cover instead of the rules provided in UG-34?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); Appendix 26 - Design and Metal
Temperatures
File: BC06-948
Question: The rules contained in Appendix 26 are only applicable when the temperature
limitations of paragraphs 26-2(e), 26-6.6.3.2(a), 26-7.6.3.2(a), and 26-8.6.3.2(a) are satisfied.
May expansion joints be used in Section VIII, Division 1 stamped pressure vessels with design
temperatures higher than those allowed in Appendix 26 if all other applicable provisions of
Section VIII, Division 1 are satisfied?
Reply: Yes, see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition); UG-79, UNF-5, and UHA-11
File: BC03-762
Question: Must a stainless steel component which receives a significant amount of cold forming
during fabrication, and is not subjected to a final solution anneal, satisfy the mechanical properties of
Code approved Section II, specification in its final formed shape?
Reply: No.
File: BC05-1586
Question (1): A long weld neck flange is connected to the shell of a pressure vessel with a Type 7
corner joint as defined in table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1. In accordance with weld joint
definitions of UW-3, is this weld a Category D weld joint?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A long weld neck flange is connected to the small end of a cylindrical transition of a
pressure vessel with a Type 1, 2, or 3 butt joint as defined in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1. In
accordance with weld joint definitions of UW-3, is this weld a Category C weld joint?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): A long weld neck flange is connected to the small end of a transition in diameter of a
pressure vessel with a Type 8 angle joint as defined in Table UW-12 of Section VIII, Division 1. In
accordance with weld joint definitions of UW-3, is this weld a Category C weld joint?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Fig. UW-13.1(k)
File: BC06-942
Question: In Fig UW-13.1 sketch (k), there are two dimensions given for the offset plate edge that
are shown as "As desired" with an additional requirement that says " 1 1/2 t minimum". Does the "1 1/2 t
minimum" value only apply to the length designated as the contact zone and, thus, is not applicable to the
extension of the offset edge past the contact zone for the parts being joined?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); Appendix 2 - Figs. 2-7.3, 2-7.4,
2-7.5 & 2-7.6
File: BC06-1047
Question: If all other applicable Appendix 2 requirements are satisfied, may the calculation
procedure given in Table 2-7.1 be used to determine flange factors when g1/go exceeds a value of 5,
which is the g1/go upper limit as plotted in Figs 2-7.3, 2-7.4, 2-7.5 and 2-7.6?
Reply: Yes
File: BC06-1123/1124
Question (1): UW-40(a)(8) of Section VIII Division 1 permits postweld heat treatment by local area
heating of configurations not addressed in UW-40(a)(1) through (a)(7), provided that other measures
(based upon sufficiently similar, documented experience or evaluation) are taken that consider the effect
of thermal gradients, all significant structural discontinuities (such as nozzles, attachments, head to shell
junctures), and any mechanical loads which may be present during postweld heat treatment. May
consideration of material properties only (e.g., thickness, material ductility or type of material) be used in
lieu of the measures listed in UW-40(a)(8) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): For the local area postweld heat treatment described in Question 1, an evaluation is
conducted using calculations or finite element techniques that considers the effect of thermal gradients
and the subsequent mechanical stresses resulting from the thermal gradients. Would such an evaluation
meet the requirements of UW-40(a)(8) of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: BC06-1362
Question: UW-40(a)(8) of Section VIII Division 1 permits postweld heat treatment by local area
heating of configurations not addressed in UW-40(a)(1) through (a)(7), provided that other measures
(based upon sufficiently similar, documented experience or evaluation) are taken that consider the effect
of thermal gradients, all significant structural discontinuities (such as nozzles, attachments, head to shell
junctures), and any mechanical loads which may be present during postweld heat treatment.
For the local area postweld heat treatment described in Question 1, do the welding residual stresses have
to be included in the evaluation of stresses during PWHT, to demonstrate that thermal gradients are not
harmful?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1(2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda) UG-116(e)
File: BC06-1117
Question: A pressure vessel is constructed in accordance with ASME Section VIII, Division 1 with
a shell made from ERW pipe welded to seamless dished heads. The head-to-shell circumferential seams
are radiographed in accordance with UW-11(a). Is it required by UG-116(e) that the vessel be marked
RT4?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); U-1(f)
File: BC06-1118
Question: A pressure vessel is used to store a final product manufactured by process which contains
water as a component used to make this final product. Is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII,
Division 1, U-1(c)(2)(f) and it's associated footnote that the final product be considered as water
containing additives?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); Appendix 2-3 Notation
File: BC06-1122
Question: For a flange with slotted bolt holes (to accommodate swing bolts), is the flange outside
diameter “A” to be used in the design calculations equal to the diameter at the inner edge of the slotted
bolt holes even though this diameter is less than the bolt circle diameter?
Reply: Yes.
File: BC06-1199
Question: When performing the external pressure design calculations for cylindrical shells and
tubes in accordance with paragraph UG-28 of Section VIII, Division 1 for an actual unsupported length,
L, longer than 50 x Do, may L/Do=50 be used?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UW-11(a)(2)
File: BC06-783
Question (1): Do Parts UCS, UNF or UHA nozzles larger than NPS 10 with wall thickness less than 1-
1/8 in. and with no Category B or C butt weld in the nozzle require radiography in accordance with UW-
11(a)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Do Parts UCS, UNF or UHA nozzles NPS 10 or smaller with wall thickness greater than
1-1/8 in. require radiography in accordance with UW-11(a) where a Category B or C butt weld is in the
nozzle?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Do Parts UCS, UNF or UHA nozzles larger than NPS 10 with wall thickness less than 1-
1/8 in. require radiography in accordance with UW-11(a) where a Category B or C butt weld is in the
nozzle?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); UHX-4(e)(2)
File: BC06-578
Question (1): UHX-4(e)(2) of Section VIII, Division 1 requires that the thickness of U-tubes after
forming not be less than the design thickness. Is it considered acceptable to evaluate the U-bent portion
of the tube separate from the straight portion when complying with this requirement?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 contain rules to determine the design thickness in the U-
bend for the external pressure condition?
Question (3): Does Section VIII, Division 1 contain rules to determine the lines of support for the
straight portion of a U-tube under external pressure?
Question (4): Does Section VIII, Division 1 contain rules to determine the amount of thinning in the U-
bend after forming?
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UG-93(a)(1) and (2)
File: BC06-1578
Question: Is it required that the pressure vessel Manufacturer perform product analysis chemistry
and/or mechanical tests as permitted by the material specification in order to determine that the material
and Material Test Report (if required) provided by a material supplier or manufacturer meet the material
specification?
Reply: No.
File: 02-3218
Question: Do the nozzle neck thickness requirements of UG-45 of Section VIII, Division 1 apply to
nozzles attached to noncircular vessels?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Vol. 52 of the interpretations.
File: 02-2792
Question: In meeting the requirements of UG-79 of Section VIII, Division 1 and AF-111 of Section
VIII, Division 2, is the use of heat or flame permitted to correct the shape of pressure parts, provided the
use of these techniques does not impair the physical properties of the material?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Vol. 53 of the interpretations. It also appears as
VIII-2-01-17.
File: 02-3521
Question: In meeting the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, are the ultrasonic examination
provisions of repairs as defined in UW-51(b) applicable to vessels examined by spot radiography in
accordance with UW-52?
Reply: No.
File: 02-4037
Question (1): For nozzles having integral type reinforcement as shown by Fig. UG-40(e-2), that must
satisfy the requirements of 1-7(b) of Appendix 1, may the limits shown by the shaded areas in Fig. 1-7-1
Case B and Fig. 1-7-2 Case B be determined using tn as defined by Fig. UG-40(e-2)?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For nozzles having integral type reinforcement as shown by Fig. UG-40(e-1), that must
satisfy the requirements of 1-7(b) of Appendix 1, may the limits shown by the shaded areas in Fig. 1-7-1
Case A and Fig. 1-7-2 Case A be determined using tn and te as defined by Fig. UG-40(e-1)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): For nozzles as described in Questions (1) and (2), may the shaded areas of Figs. 1-7-1
and 1-7-2 include all the integral nozzle material that is located within the limits established by Figs. 1-7-
1 or 1-7-2?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); Fig. UW-16.1, Sketch (h)
File: 02-4124
Question (1): Does the detail shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (h) represent an acceptable design for the
attachment of a reinforcing plate to a nozzle neck inserted through a vessel wall?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it acceptable to install a reinforcement plate on the exterior of a nozzle configuration as
shown in Fig. UW-16.1, sketch (c) by using the two fillet welds meeting the requirements as shown in
sketch (h) but with the reinforcement plate chamfered to clear the cover fillet designated as tc in sketch
(c)?
Reply (2): Yes.
File: 04-853
Question (1): Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the requirements for the
Certified Individual include knowledge of applicable Code requirements for the item to which the Code
Symbol is applied?
Reply (1): Yes; see UG-117(a)(1)(b)(3) and UG-117(a)(2)(a).
Question (2): Do the duties of the Certified Individual include verification that each item to which the
Code Symbol is applied meets all the requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): Yes; see UG-117(a)(2)(a).
Question (3): Are the qualifications and certifications of the Certified Individual in accordance with the
requirements of UG-117(a)(1)(b) subject to evaluation by ASME?
Reply (3): Yes; see UG-117(f).
Question (4): Is it required that the Certified Individual appear as a company position on the
Manufacturer’s or Assembler’s organization chart in their Quality Control System manual?
Reply (4): Yes; see Appendix 10, 10-3.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2002 Addenda); UG-84(c) and Fig. UG-84.1
File: 03-1651
Question: Is it the intent to allow the rounding, to the nearest whole number, of the average value of
the three impact test specimens as required by UG-84(c) and Fig. UG-84.1?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda); UHX-1
File: 04-010
Question: Are the rules of Part UHX mandatory for the design of a circular perforated plate with
heating elements installed in an equilateral triangle or square pattern, such as used for the end closure of a
flanged immersion heater?
Reply: No; see UHX-1.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1; Appendix 9, 9-2, Fig. 9-2, and Fig. 9-5, Jacketed Vessels
File: 04-1530
Question: May the closure bar details that are permitted only for a Type I jacketed vessel, such as in
Fig. 9-5, sketches (c), (d-1), (d-2), (e-1), and (e-2), be used for a jacketed vessel that has circumferentially
continuous jackets confined entirely to the cylindrical shell and utilizes a stay or equalizer ring to reduce
the effective length?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1998 Edition, 2000 Addenda); Appendix 2, 2-2(d)(1)
File: 01-648
Question: Does Appendix 2, 2-2(d)(1) of Section VIII, Division 1 allow a hubbed flange to be
machined from material made to a piping specification that does not require the material to be
manufactured from a hot-rolled billet, forged billet, or forged bar?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UNF-78 Clarification
File: 06-461
Question (1): Is it the intent of UNF-78 that, by its reference to Appendix 17, resistance welding is
limited to Appendix 17 construction only?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the answer to Question (1) is no, does the minimum thickness exemption of UG-
16(b)(1) apply to plate-type heat exchangers, not constructed to Appendix 17, using resistance welded
titanium heat transfer plates?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); U-1(c)(2)
File: 06-1272
Question: Is it prohibited by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 or Division 2 for a vessel to be
constructed to the rules of either Division 1 or Division 2 that is used to contain a gas that is heated by use
of a nuclear fuel?
Reply: No. However, see U-1(c)(1) or footnote 1 of AG-100.
File: 07-673
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide any specific requirements for the projection of a
stud or bolt beyond the back face of the nut for flanged or clamped connections?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UG-40, Opening Reinforcement for Spherical
Heads
File: 07-075
Question: In accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, UG-40(c), when determining the limit of
reinforcement measured normal to the vessel wall for openings in a spherical head, shall this limit of
reinforcement be taken normal to the contour of the head surface, which in this case would be a circle?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UHA-51(a)(4), FCAW-G
Welding
File: 07-418
Question: Is the FCAW-G (gas shielded flux core arc welding) process considered to be a
production welding GMAW process that is permitted by UHA-51(a)(4) when the MDMT is colder than
−320°F (−196°C)?
Reply: Yes; see Section IX.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); Code Case 2506-1
File: 07-952
Question: Is it permitted to use plate material as described in Code Case 2506-1 for the onstruction
of fixed tubesheets in a shell and tube heat exchanger subject to pressure from both the shell side and the
tube side?
Reply: Yes.
Section VIII-1 – Interpretations Vol. 58 (July 1, 2007 – December 31, 2007)

Interpretations inadvertently left out of Volume 54:
File: 01-153
Question 1: In UG-28, for values of A falling to the left of the material curve as shown on the chart is
it the intent that the value of Factor B may be calculated from the tabulated values in the table?
Reply 1: Yes, provided the user applies the Factor B so determined in the formula that contains B,
Pa = (4/3)B/(Do/t).
Question 2: Are the inconsistencies in the values of A and B significant as visually estimated from the
chart versus those interpolated from the tabulated values?
Reply 2: No.
New Interpretations:
Subject: Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UG-19 Combination
Units
File: 07-1004
Question: May a combination unit as described in paragraph UG-19(a) of Section VIII Division 1
have one independent chamber constructed and stamped to Section VIII, Division 1 and another
constructed and stamped to Section VIII, Division 2 if the common element between the two satisfies all
the requirements of both Divisions?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UG-84.1 & Fig. UCS-66
File: 07-725
Question (1): A nozzle forging that is 3 1/4 in. thick is welded into a shell that is 1 1/8 in thick. The
nozzle forging material is SA-182-F11 Class 2. After applying the rules of UCS-66, this nozzle forging
requires impact testing. Shall the maximum nominal thickness of the forging be used when determining
the required impact test energy values of the nozzle forging taken from Fig. UG-84.1, regardless of the
weld thickness used to attach it to the shell?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In order to assign the forging in question (1) above to Curve C of Fig. UCS-66 as allowed
by Note (c)(2), the material shall be produced to a fine grain practice and normalized. If there is no
evidence provided to substantiate that the material has been ordered and produced to fine grain practice as
described in SA-788 S15, may the material be assigned to Fig. UCS-66 Curve C for determination of its
minimum design metal temperature?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UW-13
File: 07-1262
Question: In accordance with Fig. UW-13.1(a), a head may be attached to a cylinder with a single
fillet lap weld (within noted restrictions of UW-13 and Table UW-12). Is it acceptable to attach a head to
a short cylinder as shown in Fig UW-13.1(a), and then attach the short cylinder to the cylindrical shell
using a single fillet lap weld?
Reply: No, the cylinder-to-cylinder single fillet lap weld does not meet the limitations of Table
UW-12 for a Type 6 joint.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); U-4
File: 07-613
Question (1): When U.S. Customary units are chosen as the primary units for the nameplate markings
and Manufacturer's Data Report, is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, U-4 for
drawings to be made with only SI or local Customary units?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When U.S. Customary units are chosen as the primary units for the nameplate markings
and Manufacturer's Data Report, is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, U-4 for
U.S. Customary units to be shown in parenthesis following SI or local customary units on the fabrication
drawings?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); U-1(c)(2), UG-19(a) and UG-
116(k)
File: 07-291
Question(1): A combination unit has one chamber (Code) that falls within the scope of Section VIII,
Division 1 and one chamber (non-Code) that meets the exemption requirements of Section VIII, Division
1, U-1(c)(2). The common elements and their attachment to both the Code and non-Code chambers meet
the design, material, fabrication, and testing requirements of Section VIII, Division 1. May the non-Code
chamber be considered outside scope of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply(1): Yes; however, see U-1(c)(1) and UG-19(a).
Question(2): For the combination unit described in Question(1), may the Section VIII, Division 1
requirements for the Manufacturer’s Data Report and marking be applied only to the Code chamber and
its common elements?
Reply(2): Yes; however, the marking recommendations in UG-116(k) for the non-Code chamber
should be followed.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1(2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UG-43
File: 07-1291
Question: In a plate and frame heat exchanger, a nozzle with a flared end is inserted through an
opening in a shell and the flared end of the nozzle contacts a gasket on the inside surface of the vessel.
The gasket is compressed by the bolts holding the plate and frame assembly together. The nozzle neck is
not otherwise expanded, welded, brazed or threaded to the vessel; do the provisions of paragraph UG-43
apply?
Interpretation: VIII-1-07-30E
Subject: UHX-ll, UHX-13, and UHX-14 Finned Tubes (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 07-1370
Question (1): A shell-and-tube heat exchanger containing finned tubes is to be designed in accordance
with Section VIII, Division 1, Part UHX. For geometries where the unfinned portion of the tubes extend
through the tubesheet, shall the effective properties and ligament efficiency of the tubesheet be
determined in accordance with UHX-l1.5.1(a) using the O.D. and thickness of the unfinned portion of the
tube?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the heat exchanger described in Question (1), do the rules in UHX-13 and UHX-14
for fixed tubesheet and floating tubesheet heat exchangers provide requirements for determining the axial
stiffness of finned tubes?
Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 58. Questions (1) and (2) have been corrected
by errata.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda); UHX-11, UHX-13 and UHX-14
Finned Tubes
File: 07-1370
Question(1): A shell-and-tube heat exchanger containing low fin tubes is to be designed in accordance
with Section VIII, Division 1, Part UHX. For geometries where the tubes extend through the tubesheet,
shall the effective properties and ligament efficiency of the tubesheet be determined in accordance with
UHX-11.5.1(a) using the O.D. and thickness of the unfinned portion of the tube?
Reply(1): Yes
Question(2): For the heat exchanger described in Question(1), do the rules provided in UHX-13 and
UHX-14 for fixed tubesheet and floating tubesheet heat exchangers consider the axial stiffness of finned
tubes?
Reply(2): No, see U-2(g).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda); Fig. UCS-66 Note (c)
File: 06-1121
Question: May all pipe, fittings, forgings and tubing that is assigned to Fig. UCS-66 Curve B by
General Note (b)(3) be assigned to Curve C if it is produced to fine grain practice and normalized?
Reply: Yes, see General Note (c)(2).
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1995 Edition); UG-99(b) and UG-100

File: 07-470
Question: Is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, beginning with the 1995
Edition, to pressure test a single chamber pressure vessel containing an internal piston that separates the
chamber into two sections; one section containing liquid and the other gas, by first testing the liquid side
per UG-99(b), and then moving the piston to the other end of the chamber and pressure testing the gas
side per UG-100?
Reply: No.
Subject: Section VIII Division 1 (2004 Edition) Mandatory Appendix 4; Indications
File: 07-1624
Question (1): In accordance with ASME Section VIII Div.1 Appendix 4(2004), is an indication to be
considered isolated if any adjacent indication is separated by a minimum distance of 1 in. on either side or
no other indications exist adjacent to the rounded indication?
Reply(1): Yes.
Question (2): In accordance with ASME Section VIII Div.1 Appendix 4 (2004) paragraph 4.3(c), is it
required to determine the acceptable size of rounded indications for each and every thickness?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): When the thickness of interest is not listed in Table 4.1, shall the acceptable size of the
rounded indication be calculated using the equations in 4-3(c)?
Reply (3): Yes
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2001Edition, 2003Addenda) Appendix 2, 2-9 and 2-11
File: 03-1834
Question: May Appendix 2 of Section VIII Division 1 be used to design split loose flanges under
external pressure if the provisions of paragraph 2-9 and 2-11 are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition); UG-120 and Appendix W, Partial Data Reports
File: 07-139
Question (1): A head and head blank Manufacturer with a valid Certificate of Authorization provides
welded, flat circular plates that require a U2 or U2A Partial Data Report. These welded flat circular plates
are provided to a second head manufacturer who may or may not be in possession of a valid Certificates
of Authorization. Is it required by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that either the head blank
Manufacturer or the second head manufacturer supply an additional U2 or U2A form, or list the elliptical
ratio or crown and knuckle radii on the existing U2 or U2A form, when the head is formed.
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If a Manufacturer provides welded circular blanks for internal use to form heads without
supplying a U2 or U2A, must one be supplied when providing the completed head to the vessel
Manufacturer?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: UG-101(k) and UG-101(p), External MAWP of Bimetallic Tubes (2001 Edition)
File: 02-3319
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 have rules to establish the external maximum allowable
working pressure of a bimetallic tube that does not meet the requirements of UCL or ULW?
Subject: UG-125(a) (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda)
File: 06-1323
Question: Is it the intent of Section VIII, Division 1, UG-125(a) to permit flow paths or vents, open
directly or indirectly to the atmosphere, to be used to protect against over pressure for pressure vessels
constructed in accordance with this Division?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Appendix 2, 2-11 and 2-13 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda)
File: 03-1846
Question: May Appendix 2 of Section VIII, Division 1 be used to design reverse flanges under
external pressure if the provisions of 2-11 and 2-13 are satisfied?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UHA-51(a)(4) (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 07-612
Question (1): An ASME WPS/PQR using austenitic base materials to SA-240 Type 304L (Dual Certified)
with semi-automatic GMAW butt weld using a filler metal other than Type 316L was subjected to notch
toughness testing at both −320°F and −452°F. The base material, heat affected zone (HAZ), and deposited
filler metal was able to and did pass the acceptance criteria of UHA-51(a)(4)(a)(1), (2), and (3). Does this
satisfy UHA-51(a)(1) and UHA-51(a)(4) impact testing requirements as permitted in UHA-51(a)(4)(b)
“when the base metal, weld metal, or filler metal are unable to meet the requirements of (a) above”?
Reply (1): No. The requirements of UHA-51(a)(4)(a) are not met because the filler metal is not
316L. The requirements of UHA-51(a)(4)(b) are not met because toughness tests were not conducted at
the MDMT in accordance with the ASTM E 1820 JIC method.
Question (2): The ASME WPS/PQR described in Question (1) was changed to use nickel-based filler
metal to SFA-5.14, AWS ERNiCrMo-3 and was subjected to notch toughness testing at both −320°F and
−452°F. The base material, heat affected zone (HAZ), and deposited filler metal was able to and did pass
the acceptance criteria of UHA-51(a)(4)(a)(2) and (3). ERNiCrMo-3, being a nonferrous material, does
not have a Ferrite Number (FN). Does this satisfy UHA-51(a)(1) and UHA-51(a)(4) impact test
requirements as permitted in UHA-51(a)(4)(b) “when the base metal, weld metal, or filler metal are
unable to meet the requirements of (a) above”?
Reply (2): No. Use of ERNiCrMo-3 does not meet the requirements of UHA-51(a)(4)(a), as this
paragraph refers to the use of 316L exclusively. If ERNiCrMo-3 is used it must be tested in accordance
with UHA-51(a)(4)(b). Ferrite content is not applicable for Ni alloys, and therefore references to ferrite
are not applicable.
Question (3): If the ASME WPS/PQR described in the questions above using SFA-5.9 AWS ER308L
or SFA-5.14 AWS ERNiCrMo-3 fillers subjected to impact testing at both −320°F and −452°F did not
pass the acceptance criteria of UHA-51(a)(4)(a)(1), (2), and (3), may the notch toughness testing of UHA-
51(a)(4)(b)(1), (2), and (3) be conducted, and if acceptable to the criteria therein, be acceptable for the
UHA-51(a)(1) and UHA-51(a)(4) impact test requirements?
Reply (3): Yes. PQR qualification for all filler metals other than 316L must be conducted in
accordance with UHA-51(a)(4)(b)(1), (2), and (3).
Question (4): If the reply to Question (3) is yes, then if SFA-5.9 AWS ER308L, filler metal with an FN
>5, and the notch toughness testing of UHA-51(a)(4)(b)(1), (2), and (3) are conducted, and if acceptable
to the criteria therein, are these criteria acceptable for the UHA-51(a)(1) and UHA-51(a)(4) impact testing
requirements?
Reply (4): Yes, provided ferrite content does not exceed the FN of the test weld.
Subject: UG-11(a)(1), Manufacturer's Standard
File: 07-394
Question (1): In applying the provisions ofUG-11 for Manufacturer's standard parts, is the
"Manufacturer" in this context an enterprise that develops and manufactures standard "catalogue"
products for inclusion into a pressure vessel with a Code Symbol Stamp?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): May a Manufacturer of pressure vessels who holds a Certificate of Authorization produce
parts to an internal standard that satisfies the intent of UG-11, and that will be installed on its Code
stamped vessels?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): When the Manufacturer of a vessel to be marked with the Code symbol uses a
Manufacturer's standard part, is the vessel Manufacturer responsible to satisfy himself that the part is
suitable for the design conditions specified for the completed vessel in accordance with the rules of this
Division?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: UG-116(e)
File: 07-1364
Question: In accordance with the marking requirements of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, UG-
116(e), is a pressure vessel that consists of seamless ellipsoidal heads attached to a shell section with a
longitudinal weld, and when the complete vessel is spot radiographed in accordance with UW-11(b), to be
marked RT-3?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-20(a)
File: 02-4113
Question: Does ASME Section VIII, Division 1 require a user to consider the effects of startup,
shutdown, or other abnormal conditions listed in U-2(a) when determining the design temperature as per
UG-20(a), and the design pressure as per UG-21?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Appendix 20, 20-2 (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 07-2038
Question: Is it permissible to perform the transverse tension tests as required in Appendix 20, 20-2
on a per-heat basis instead of per plate?
Reply: No.
Subject: U-1(c)(2)
File: 07-1263
Question: Paragraph U-1(c)(2) provides the definition of classes of vessels not considered to be
within the scope of Section VIII, Division 1. Is it required to apply the ASME Code symbol [U or UM] to
equipment that is not listed in the scope exemptions or only partially satisfies the provisions of U-1(c)(2)
for a specific item?
Reply: See U-1(c)(1). The Code does not mandate the application of the ASME Code symbol for
any piece of equipment. The laws or regulations issued by the municipality, state, provincial, federal, or
other enforcement or regulatory bodies having jurisdiction at the location of an installation establish the
mandatory applicability of the Code rules, in whole or in part, within their jurisdiction. Those laws or
regulations may require the use of this Division of the Code for vessels or components not considered to
be within its Scope.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-2-07-07 and VIII-3-07-04.
Subject: UG-90(b)(8) (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 08-105
Question: Does UG-90(b)(8) require the inspector to be involved in repairs other than the base
metal repairs as addressed in UG-78?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-28 (2007 Edition)
File: 08-362
Question: The design length for external pressure design of a vessel section, L, is shown
schematically in Fig. UG-28 as the distance between flanges. Does this length, L, apply to integral type
flanges (see Mandatory Appendix 2, Fig. 2-4) if the flanges meet the requirements of UG-29 for stiffening
rings?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-10
File: 07-2024
Question: May castings tested for mechanical properties in accordance with the rules of EN 1563 be
accepted for ASME Section VIII, Division
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-22 and U-2(g) (2007 Edition)
File: 08-637
Question (1): Is it permissible to construct a vessel in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 if the
design is governed by cyclic loading?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-22(e) and U-2(g).
Question (2): Does the Code define any specific volumetric nondestructive examination requirements
for a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel whose design is governed by cyclic loading?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): When designing a vessel in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1 for cyclic pressure
service, is it required to consider the effects of weld seam peaking in the fatigue analysis if such
consideration would have an impact on the required fatigue life of the vessel?
Reply (3): Yes. See U-2(g).
Subject: UW-2(d), Service Restrictions, Pressure Vessels, or Parts Subject to Direct Firing
File: 01-378
Question: Is it required by UW-2(d)(2) to postweld heat treatment of the entire vessel when
chambers, sections, or parts of the completed vessel are not subject to direct firing?
Reply: No.
Subject: Appendix 28 and Fig. UW-13.2 (2007 Edition)
File: 08-888
Question: Mandatory Appendix 28 provides an alternative to the requirement “a + b not be less than
2ts” given in UW-13(e)(4) and Fig. UW-13.2. When applying the provisions of Appendix 28, is the
requirement shown in Fig. UW-13.2 as “tp not less than the smaller of ts or 1⁄4 in.” still mandatory?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-36(c)(3)(a) (2007 Edition)
File: 08-909
Question: In UG-36(c)(3)(a), does the term “vessel shells or heads with a required minimum
thickness” refer to the minimum thickness as determined by UG-27, UG-28, UG-32, and UG-33 as
applicable?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-80, UW-9(c), and UW-35, Out-of-Roundness Due to Weld Distortions (Peaking)
File: 08-114
Question (1): In accordance with the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, may the sections of a
multisegment shell course be different thicknesses?
Reply (1): Yes. See UW-9(c).
Question (2): Are the rules in UG-80 for out-of-roundness applicable to determine the acceptance
criteria for weld distortions (such as peaking) in a cylindrical shell?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Appendix 2-14
File: 08-716
Question: In satisfying the provisions of 2-14 for flange rigidity, shall the rigidity index be
determined for both the gasket seating and operating conditions in order to establish the governing case?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Appendix 28 and Fig. UG-34(g)
File: 08-1043
Question (1): The corner joint welds between the short and long plates for a noncircular vessel shall
meet the requirements of Fig. UW-13.2 or Appendix 28; do the requirements of Fig. UW-13.2 or
Appendix 28 also apply to a weld made in accordance with Fig. UG-34(g) that attaches a flat end plate to
the inside of the noncircular vessel?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the provisions for weld joint size shown in Fig. 28-1(b) are used, is it required to
prepare and qualify a sample comer weld joint in accordance with Appendix 28-2(a)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: UG-36 and UG-37
File: 08-1081
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 require analysis or consideration of the axial thrust load
due to pressure acting on a nozzle (blinded or not) in addition to satisfying the reinforcement rules of UG-
36 and UG-37?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-51, Radiographer Certification
File: 07-134
Question: According to Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 6, 6.2(a), must a Certified MT examiner
be approved in the ability to distinguish and differentiate contrast among shades of gray if the
Manufacturer determines that this is a technique of the magnetic particle examination method for which
he is certified?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-ll(a)(5)(b), Table UW-12(b), UW-52, UG-116(e)
File: 08-104
Question: A group of identical pressure vessels are constructed in accordance with the rules of
Section VIII, Division 1. The Category A and B welds are grouped together for spot radiography as
permitted by UW-52(b)(1). The 50-ft weld increment covers more than one pressure vessel. Is it
permitted by the rules of Section VIII, Division 1 that the joint efficiency as defined in UW-12 apply to
all the pressure vessels covered by the weld increment, whether or not it received radiography?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-93(d)(3)
File: 08-826
Question: Are the NDE provisions of UG-93(d)(3) required if a forging is used for a flat head or
cover?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-31(b) and (c), Alignment
File: 08-838
Question: Does the Code prohibit the use of force in order to achieve the fitting and alignment
requirements described in UW-31?
Reply: No.
Subject: Appendix 2-4(a)(1) and Fig. 2-4, Sketches (1) and (1a)
File: 08-1302
Question: For the design of a loose type flange, does Appendix 2 require a full face gasket that
extends across the lap width as shown diagrammatically in Fig. 2-4, sketch (1) or (1a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-2(a) and Appendix 26, Lethal Service
File: 08-1068
Question: May an expansion joint, meeting the requirements of Appendix 26 in Section VIII,
Division 1, and attached to weld ends in accordance with Fig. 26-13, be used in a vessel designed to UW-
2(a)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-101(p)
File: 08-1351
Question (1): A pressure vessel is to be proof tested under the provisions of UG-101(p), is it required to
determine the MAWP by burst testing using the provisions of UG-101(m)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the dimensions of a pressure vessel used in the UG-101(p) proof test do not represent
the corroded condition, is the correction factor given in UG-101(i) applicable for adjusting the MAWP?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): If a vessel that is proof tested in accordance with UG-101(p) has a design temperature
where the allowable stress listed in Section II, Part D in less than the allowable stress at the proof test
temperature, is it required to adjust the MAWP as required in UG-101(k)?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: UG-37, UG-40(b), Fig. UHX-13.1(a)
File: 08-1429
Question: May the limits of reinforcement, as given in UG-40, and the nozzle reinforcement area
include metal from a tubesheet welded to the shell or channel?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-46(a)
File: 07-543
Question: Shall all pressure vessels for use with compressed air be provided with inspection
openings even when no corrosion allowance is specified or when previous experience has shown that
corrosion does not occur?
Reply: Yes, unless the dew point requirements of UG-46(a) are met.
Subject: UF-5(b) and UF-7
File: 08-599
Question: Is it permitted to perform seal welding of shrink-fit trunnions to roll body made of SA-
649 Class 1A, 1B, 2, or 5, when by heat analysis the carbon contentof either part to be welded exceeds
0.50%?
Reply: Yes, see UF-7 and 4.3 of SA-649.
Subject: Nonmandatory Appendix W, Manufacturer's Data Reports
File: 08-1042
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 that Manufacturer's Data
Reports U-l and U-1A record the actual temperature and hold time for post weld heat treatment and not
the Code specified. minimum requirements?
Reply: Yes. See note 27 of Table W-3.
Interpretation: VIII-1-07-30E
Subject: UHX-ll, UHX-13, and UHX-14 Finned Tubes (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 07-1370
Question (1): A shell-and-tube heat exchanger containing finned tubes is to be designed in accordance
with Section VIII, Division 1, Part UHX. For geometries where the unfinned portion of the tubes extend
through the tubesheet, shall the effective properties and ligament efficiency of the tubesheet be
determined in accordance with UHX-l1.5.1(a) using the O.D. and thickness of the unfinned portion of the
tube?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): For the heat exchanger described in Question (1), do the rules in UHX-13 and UHX-14
for fixed tubesheet and floating tubesheet heat exchangers provide requirements for determining the axial
stiffness of finned tubes?
Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 58. Questions (1) and (2) have been corrected
by errata.
Volumn 60 Starts Here
Subject: Figure UW-13.1, Dished Intermediate Head
File: 08-1396
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide any details or requirements for attaching a
spherically dished intermediate head to the inside of a cylindrical shell using a weld through the thickness
of the intermediate head?
Subject: U-1(e)(3) and UG-120(e), Requirements for Elliptical Manway and Handhole Bolting
Materials
File: 08-1399
Question: U-1(e)(3) includes pressure retaining covers of manways, handholes, and their attaching
bolting and nuts within the scope of the Code, and UG-120(e) requires that pressure retaining covers and
their attaching bolting and nuts be recorded on the manufacturer’s data report. Some manways and
handholes are designed such that the cover fits on the inside surface of the vessel and the seal/gasket is
compressed by the internal pressure acting on the cover. The yoke and bolts associated with such designs
are not required to resist any pressure loads and are only used to hold and position the pressure retaining
cover until pressure is applied. As these yokes, bolts, and nuts are not pressure retaining components, are
they required to be of Code materials and listed on the manufacturer’s data report?
Reply: No.
Note: This interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Vol. 59 of the interpretations
Subject: Code Case 2235-9
File: 08-1260
Question (1): Does Code Case 2235-9 require an ultrasonic examination plan capable of detecting
indications transverse as well as parallel to the weld centerline?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Are the acceptance criteria specified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Code Case 2235-9
applicable to indications oriented transverse as well as parallel to the weld centerline?
Reply (2): Yes. Per para. (c), the ultrasonic examination shall be performed in accordance with a
written procedure conforming to the requirements of Section V, Article 4. T-472 of Section V, Article 4
identifies examination requirements when using the Distance Amplitude Technique, such as Linear
Phased Array ultrasonics, and T-474 covers Non-Distance Amplitude Techniques. From T-472, weld
joints shall be scanned with an angle beam search unit in both parallel and transverse directions (four
scans) to the weld axis.
Subject: UG-34 and UG-39, Blind Flange Thickness
File: 08-1562
Question: If an opening in a blind flange is greater than that allowed by provisions of ASME B16.5,
is it required to use UG-34(c)(2) and UG-39 to determine the required thickness and reinforcement in lieu
of the dimensions and pressure ratings that are given in B16.5?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-37 and UG-40
File: 08-1725
Question (1): UG-37(a) allows nozzle reinforcement calculations to be based on the required thickness
of a sphere when the nozzle and all of its reinforcement are included within the spherical part of an F&D
head or within 80% of the diameter of an elliptical head. When the limits of reinforcement of UG-40
extend beyond the spherical part of an F&D head or beyond 80% of the ellipsoidal head diameter, is it
acceptable to use the required thickness of the sphere if only that material within the spherical part of an
F&D head or within 80% of the diameter of an ellipsoidal head is considered as reinforcement?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In the definition of “t” in UG-37(a), does the phrase “not including forming allowances”
mean that any additional thickness added as a forming allowance shall not be considered in determining
the value of “t”?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: U-2(g), UW-20, Part UHX, UHX-11.5, UHX-15, and Appendix A; Tube Expansion
Depth Ratio and Tube Joint Loads
File: 08-1286
Question (1): In accordance with the rules given in UHX-11.5.1(a), shall the tube expansion depth ratio
(ρ) be equal to zero when the tubes are not expanded to the tubesheet (e.g., welded only)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Does Part UHX have rules for calculating the tube-to-tubesheet joint load?
Note: File 05-484 is open to develop rules to calculate the tube-to-tubesheet joint load.
Question (3): For tube-to-tubesheet strength welds (full or partial) defined in UW-20, do UW-20 and
UHX-15 require that the tube-to-tubesheet joint load be determined and compared with the maximum
allowable load in either direction on the tube-to-tubesheet joint (Lmax) whether or not the Code has rules
for determining the tube-to-tubesheet joint load?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): For tube-to-tubesheet joints that do not meet UW-20, does the Code have mandatory
rules for determining the tube joint load and the tube joint strength of tube-to-tubesheet joints in shell-
and-tube heat exchangers that meet the requirements of Part UHX?
Reply (4): No, see U-2(g), UHX-15, and Nonmandatory Appendix A
File: 08-1259
Question (1): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may a side drilled hole be used to represent a flaw for
qualification purposes?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may a notch that has been machined by conventional
methods on the end of a block and left open (i.e., not totally embedded so that the UT procedure cannot
demonstrate detection of both ends) be used to represent a flaw for qualification purposes?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may electric discharged machined (EDM) notches be
used to represent embedded or surface flaws for qualification purposes?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), for a production weld with a 60 deg included angle (e.g.,
30 deg bevel angle) joint detail, must the plane of the flaws in the qualification block be oriented at a 30
deg angle to the block’s surface and parallel to the fusion line?
Reply (4): No.
Subject: Thickness of Heat Transfer Plates in Plate-Type Heat Exchangers
File: 08-948
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 contain design rules that may be used to establish the
minimum required thickness or MAWP of the heat transfer plates in plate-type heat exchangers?
Vol 60 of 2010 Edition starts here
Subject: SA-182
File: 08-617
Question: Does Section VIII, Division 1 prohibit the use of SA-182 to fabricate a tubesheet in a
heat exchanger?
Reply: No.
Subject: Applicability of UT Acceptance-Rejection Criteria of Appendix 12, Para. 12-3 When
Applying UT in Lieu of RT in Accordance With Code Case 2235
File: 09-577
Question: During construction, when applying ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography per
Code Case 2235, is it required to meet the acceptance-rejection standards of para. 12-3?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-16(f)(3)(a)(3)(a)
File: 09-637
Question: A standard NPS 1 1/2 coupling with an outside diameter of 2 1/2 in. is attached to a
vessel wall using a single fillet weld in accordance with UW-16(f)(3)(a). Shall the minimum weld throat
thickness required by UW-16(f)(3)(a)(3)(a) be based on an NPS 1 1/2 pipe when doing the UG-45(a) and
(b) evaluation?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Nonmandatory Appendix G, G-2
File: 09-607
Question: Nonmandatory Appendix G makes reference to several documents that may be used as
guidance in the design of vessel supports and attachments. When a Manufacturer uses one of these
referenced documents, such as the Manual for Steel Construction, do all the requirements of that
document then become a mandatory Code requirement?
Reply: No.
File: 09-808
Question: In order to meet the flaw acceptance criteria of Table 1, shall both the limits on a/t and l
be satisfied, e.g., for a subsurface flaw, a/t is limited to 0.143 regardless of l, and l is limited to 0.25 in.
(6.4 mm) regardless of a/t?
Reply: Yes. Both criteria must be met.
Subject: Appendix 1-5(e), Appendix 1-8, and UG-33, Conical Sections
File: 08-1546
Question (1): A cone-to-cylinder transition under internal pressure is made with a knuckle (flare) at the
small end of the cone. Is it required to perform reinforcement calculations in accordance with Appendix
1-5?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 provide rules for determining the required thickness for
internal pressure of a knuckle at the small end of a cone-to-cylinder junction?
Question (3): In accordance with the provisions of UG-33, if a cone-to-cylinder junction (without a
knuckle) is not considered to be a line of support, must the reinforcement requirements of Appendix 1-8
be satisfied?
Reply (3): Yes.
Question (4): In accordance with the provisions of UG-33, if a cone-to-cylinder junction is considered
to be a line of support, must both the reinforcement (if there is not a knuckle) and moment of inertia
requirements of Appendix 1-8 be satisfied?
Reply (4): Yes.
Subject: UW-16(b) and Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (g)
File: 09-1043
Question: A nozzle that is similar to Fig. UW-16.1 sketch (g) is attached such that the nozzle
forging has an internal projection at some locations around the opening. For those sections of the nozzle
with an internal projection, is it required to maintain the r1 dimension at the outside diameter of the nozzle
forging?
Reply: No.
Subject: UHX-19.2.2 and UHX-19.3, Caution Marking and Manufacturer's Data Report
Information for Fixed Tubesheet Heat Exchangers
File: 09-719
Question (1): Does UHX-19.2.2 require that nameplates used for the caution marking meet the
requirements of UG-119 with respect to nameplate thickness, height of characters, and indentation depth
or raised height of characters?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UHX-19.2.2 require that the operating temperatures used to determine the mean
metal temperatures and axial differential thermal expansion for Loading Cases 4 through 7 [UHX-
13.4(a)(4) through UHX-13.4(a)(7)] be included in the caution marking?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Does UHX-19.3 require that the operating temperatures used to determine the mean
metal temperatures and axial differential thermal expansion for Loading Cases 4 through 7 [UHX-
13.4(a)(4) through UHX-13.4(a)(7)] be indicated on the Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (3): No.
Question (4): Does UHX-19.2.2 require that the mean metal temperatures used to determine the axial
differential thermal expansion for Loading Cases 4 through 7 [UHX-13.4(a)(4) through UHX-13.4(a)(7)]
be included in the caution marking?
Reply (4): No.
Question (5): Does UHX-19.3 require that the mean metal temperatures used to determine the axial
differential thermal expansion for Loading Cases 4 through 7 [UHX-13.4(a)(4) through UHX-13.4(a)(7)]
be indicated on the Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (5): No.
Subject: UG-99(a)(1) and UW-33(a)
File: 08-1762
Question (1): Is it permitted by the rules of UG-99(a)(1) to remove weld reinforcement meeting the
requirements of UG-35(d) by grinding following hydrostatic pressure testing and prior to the AI signing
the Manufacturer's Data Report?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Is it required to measure the maximum offset of a butt weld joint after the completion of
the welding process in order to determine whether the UW-33 alignment tolerance is met?
Reply (2): Yes.

Subject: Part UHX and UHX-13, Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers With Conical Sections
File: 09-586
Question (1): Do the rules provided in UHX-13 consider shell-and-tube heat exchangers having shells
that contain conical sections?
Question (2): Do the rules provided in Part UHX for the design tubesheets for shell-and-tube heat
exchangers with integral channels or shells consider conical sections that are closer to the tubesheet than
1.8Sqrt(Dt), where D is the diameter and t is the thickness of the applicable integral section adjacent to
the tubesheet?
Note: Record 07-218 is open to develop rules for fixed tubesheet heat exchangers to account for the
stiffness of shells containing conical shell sections.
Subject: Introduction, U-l(c)(2)(f), Pressurized Air in a Vessel Containing Water
File: 09-771
Question: Paragraph U-l(c)(2)(f) recognizes that a vessel may be designed with a constant mass of
air that serves as a cushion of pressurized air. When water enters the pressure vessel, the air pressure so
created is directly related to the increase in water volume and the associated decrease in air volume in the
vessel. Is a pressure vessel containing water with a design pressure of less than 300 psi (2 MPa) and a
design temperature of less than 210°F (99°C) and is designed to be pressurized by air from an external
source a class of vessel that is not included in the Scope of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 per U-
l(c)(2)(f)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Part UHX, Stress Criteria for Pressure Test Condition
File: 09-594
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 require that calculations for the pressure test condition of
shell-and-tube heat exchangers be performed using the applicable calculation procedure given in Part
UHX with the test pressure conditions substituted for the design pressure conditions?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the pressure test condition calculations described by Question (1) are performed on
shell and-heat exchangers designed in accordance with Part UHX, does Section VIII, Division 1 provide
rules to determine the allowable stress criteria for such calculations?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Appendix 10, 10-13, Record Retention
File: 08-1207
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 10, para. 10-13,
or ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 2, Annex 2.E, para. 2.E.13, or ASME Section VIII, Division 3,
Appendix 2, para. 2-121 that records as required by the aforementioned sections be maintained in a paper
form?
Reply: No.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-2-10-02 and VIII-3-10-01.
Subject: UCS-67(a)(1) (2007 Edition, 2008 Addenda)
File: 08-1027
Question: A thin wall nozzle neck is attached to a thick wall vessel by a Category D, Type 7 corner
joint. The selected material and thickness of the shell require impact testing for the desired MDMT per
UCS-66(a). The longitudinal butt-welded assembly of the shell requires impact testing to achieve the
desired MDMT for the selected material, the governing thickness per UCS-66(a)(1)(a). The nozzle
material does not require impact testing because of its material and thickness per UCS-66(a). The
governing thickness for the welded assembly of the nozzle to shell is based upon the nozzle thickness per
UCS-66(a)(1)(b). Using this governing thickness, both base metals are exempt from impact testing per
UCS-66(a). Do the rules of UCS-67(a)(1)
require qualification with impact testing of the WPS to be used for welding the nozzle neck to the shell,
since the shell material requires impact testing?
Reply: Yes, unless other exemptions from toughness testing are applicable.
Subject: UW-9(d), Table UW-12 (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 02-3088
Question (1): Does Section VIII, Division 1 restrict the number of longitudinal welded joints that may
be located in a single shell course?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does Section VIII, Division 1 specify a minimum width between adjacent longitudinal
weld joints located within a single shell course?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): Does Section VIII, Division 1 dictate the sequence of assembly and examination in a
single shell course when more than one longitudinal weld seam is employed (i.e., welding before or after
rolling)?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: UG-82
File: 07-169
Question: When pressure or nonpressure parts extend over pressure retaining welds that are not
otherwise required to be fully radiographed, is that portion of the weld to be covered required to be
radiographed after being ground flush as required by UG-82(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: Code Case 2235-9 (i)(3), Use of Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of Radiography
File: 09-573
Question: When implementing Code Case 2235-9, may a flaw that was detected during the initial
computerized examination be evaluated using a supplemental manual technique for acceptance?
Reply: Yes, provided the supplemental manual technique has been qualified and demonstrated to
size similar flaws at similar material depths.
Subject: UG-82 and UW-52
File: 10-186
Question (1): A given 50 ft increment of weld to be spot radiographed per UW-52(b)(1) is stopped
before its completion, and welding does not resume for several days. May the completed increment still
be represented by a single spot examination, provided such examination is made as soon as practicable
after completion of the increment, and that the increment was welded by one welder?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): In the situation described in Question (1), is there a maximum time period from when a
50 ft weld increment is stopped to when welding is resumed, that would require an additional spot
radiograph to represent that part of the weld increment that was made after resumption of welding?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): If the reply to Question (2) is “No,” would an additional spot radiograph be required if
the resumption of welding was performed by a different welder?
Reply (3): Yes, see UW-52(b)(2).
Subject: Appendix 9, Heat Exchanger Distributor Belts With Shell Openings
File: 10-354
Question (1): A heat exchanger has a distributor belt (or bustle) that is continuous around the outside of
the shell. Likewise, the shell is continuous across the belt and has openings that allow flow into the shell
side of the exchanger which results in equal pressure in the belt and shell. The geometry and loading are
physically the same as for a Type 1 jacket given in Fig. 9-2. Is it acceptable to use the provisions of
Appendix 9 for the design of the closure bar and weld details for this construction, provided the
longitudinal stress in the cross section of the shell with the openings does not exceed the stress criteria
given in UG-23?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-2(g).
Question (2): For the exchanger in Question (1), do the provisions of UG-37 apply for the openings in
the shell?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: Part UHT, Cap Screws
File: 10-329
Question: SA-574, Grade 4140 bolts are listed in Table UCS-23 but are not listed in Note (c) to Fig.
UCS-66; therefore impact testing per UG-84 is required. The acceptance criteria in UG-84 for this UCS
material having a minimum tensile stress greater than 95,000 psi (655 kPa) references UHT-6(a)(3) and
UHT-6(a)(4). The Scope of Part UHT states that the rules of Part UHT are applicable to pressure vessels
and vessel parts that are constructed of ferritic steels suitable for welding. Are the acceptance criteria for
lateral expansion as stated in UHT-6(a)(3) and UHT-6(a)(4) and referenced by UG-84(c)(4)(b) applicable
to SA-574, Grade 4140, nonwelded bolts?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-52, Spot Radiography of Multiple Vessels (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 06-679
Question: Multiple vessels are constructed in which the shell long seam is a Type 1 butt joint with
a joint efficiency of 0.85 per Table UW-12, and are spot radiographed every 50 ft of weld increment in
accordance with UW-52. The vessels are such that the 50 ft of weld increment would encompass a
number of vessels. The spot radiograph is taken on a shell the same material, diameter, joint
configuration, and thickness as the production vessels, but approximately 12 in. long to accommodate the
radiograph. The same welder performs all the welds. These shell sections are not retained after the RT
has been accepted. May the approximate 12 in. long shell above be used to satisfy the spot radiograph
requirements of UW-52 if the shell is not to be used for a production vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-31(c) and (d)
File: 08-1361
Question (1): In fitting up preformed sections of a multipiece vessel head, does the Code prohibit the
use of means such as forming by blows, jacking, and heating of rolled section edges, or any combination
there of such that any offset of edges to be butt welded shall be within the allowable tolerances in Table
UW-33?
Reply (1): No, see UG-79(a), UCS-79(b) and (c).
Question (2): In fitting up circumferential joints of a head to a shell ring or shell rings together, does
the Code prohibit the use of means such as forming by blows, jacking, and heating of rolled section
edges, or any combination thereof such that any offset of edges to be butt welded shall be within the
allowable tolerances in Table UW-33?
Reply (2): No, see UG-79(a), UCS-79(b) and (c).
Subject: UW-34 (2007 Edition)
File: 09-1762
Question (1): A hole [not greater than 23⁄8 in. (60 mm)] was erronously drilled in a component of a
quick actuating cover; is it acceptable to utilize the construction requirements of UW-34 to close the hole?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): If the reply to Question (1) is “No,” does the Code provide specific rules to cover such
instances?
Reply (2): No, see UG-78.
Subject: ULW-77(d), Area Limits for Multiple Gaps Between Adjacent Layers in a Layered
Vessel
File: 04-1109
Question: A layered vessel is found to have more than one gap between adjacent layers. The sum of
the gap lengths are less than the inside diameter of the vessel. Is it required by ULW-77(d) of Section
VIII, Division 1 that the combined area of the gaps shall not exceed the thickness of a layer expressed in
square inches?
Reply: No, the maximum area applies to each gap individually.
Subject: UCS-56(d)(2), Rate of Heating During PWHT
File: 06-1195
Question: In accordance with the provisions of UCS-56(d)(2), if there are components in the
assembly, such as nozzle forgings, that are thicker than either the shell or head plate, does the thickness of
such components need be considered in meeting the requirements for the maximum heating rate?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-13 (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 10-637
Question: A half pipe header is welded to a vessel from one side only utilizing a permanent backing
strip to form a corner joint as shown in Fig. UW-13.2, sketch (e-1); does the Code prohibit the backing
strip from being an integral part of the half pipe header base material (e.g., it is formed by machining or
extruding from the header material)?
Reply: No.
Volume 61 July 1, 2011 Starts Here
Subject: U-1(e), Adjacent or Concentric Connection Surfaces (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 10-171
Question: Consider a pressure vessel built in accordance with the rules of ASME Section VIII,
Division 1. The vessel contains a nozzle that has at its open end machined surfaces for use of special
fitting to temporarily close the nozzle during hydrostatic pressure testing. Following the pressure test, the
temporary closure is removed, and tubing is inserted into the nozzle and brazed in place to material
beyond the location of the seal provided by the temporary closure. Is it required for any nozzle portion
that is beyond the brazed connection between the nozzle and the tubing to be considered within the scope
of ASME Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-101, Review Transfer of Proof Test Reports Between Manufacturers (2010 Edition)
File: 10-1329
Question: When using UG-101 in Section VIII, Division 1, as the design criteria, would it be
acceptable to use a proof test from a Sister Company that is a stamp holder, when both companies having
the same Authorized Inspection Agency and if all the design criteria remain the same and the parts
conform to UG-101(d)(l) or UG-101(d)(2)? It is given that all other parameters are met and the company
reviews and approves the proof test and provides for outside proof testing in the Quality Control Manual
from a Sister Company.
Reply: No.
Subject: Appendix 10, 10-13 (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 09-1598
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 10-13 that finite
element analyses conducted as part of the design analysis be retained for three years as design
calculations?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-50, Nondestructive Examination (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)

File: 10-183
Question: Is it required that the examinations, when specified by UW-50 of Section VIII, Division
1, be performed prior to the pneumatic test?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-9(c) and Fig. UW-16.1(g) (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 10-749
Question (1): For a vessel constructed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, is it permissible to
weld a welding neck flange (that is included within the scope of the Code) to the neck of an integrally
reinforced nozzle similar to that depicted by Fig. UW-16.l(g)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If the reply to question (1) is "yes," do the requirements of Fig. UW-13.4 apply to the
transition between the nozzle neck and flange?
Reply (2): No. See UW-9(c).
Subject: UCL-34(a) (2010 Edition)
File: 10-1831
Question: If a P-No. 1 base material with a butt weld thicker than 1.5 in. (38 mm) is fabricated, has
cladding applied, is postweld heat treated, and then the cladding is removed and weld metal overlay is
applied, is it required to repeat the postweld heat treatment of the butt weld?
Reply: No.
Subject: Part UW, Table UW-12, Joint Efficiency (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 09-1015
Question: Is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Table UW-12 for a Type 1
weld joint to be assigned a joint efficiency from Table UW-12 when visual examination of the interior
surface of the weld is not performed?
Reply: Yes, provided the requirements in UW-35 and UW-37(d) are met.
Volume 62 (1-1-12) starts here
Subject: UG-20(d) [Division 1 (2010 Edition)] and 4.1.5.2(d)(3) [Division 2 (2010 Edition)]
File: 10-1800
Question: When heat transfer calculations demonstrate that the temperature of a flange and its
bolting is less than the temperature of the adjacent vessel components, may the flange and bolting be
considered as a zone in accordance with Section VIII, Division 1, UG-20(d), and Section VIII, Division 2,
4.1.5.2(d)(3), which would permit a lower design temperature to be used for the flange and bolting than
that used for the adjacent components?
Reply: Yes.

Subject: UG-10 (2010 Edition), Recertified Material P-Number
File: 11-246
Question: May a material that was originally identified with a specification not permitted by
Section VIII, Division 1, but was recertified by the vessel manufacturer to a permitted specification in
accordance with UG-10(a)(2), use the same P-Number designation of the permitted specification?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-13(f), Fig. UW-13.3(b); and Appendix 20, Hub Design (2010 Edition)
File: 11-335
Question: A hub is machined from a flat plate by machining a groove in the plate such that the end
of the hub does not project beyond the face of the original plate as shown in Fig. UW-13.3(b). Do the
requirements of Appendix 20 apply?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UHA-34 (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File: 05-397
Question: A vessel is constructed of austenitic chromium–nickel alloy steel, containing longitudinal
and circumferential seam welds that exceed a nominal size of 3/4 in. (19 mm). The welds are 100%
radiographed in accordance with UW-51 and UHA-33. May the radiography be used to substitute for the
liquid penetrant examination required by UHA-34?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-27 (2010 Edition)
File: 10-1670
Question (1): An ellipsoidal head is attached to the outside diameter of a cylindrical shell by a threaded
connection. Does the threaded portion of the shell and head need to meet the wall thickness requirements
of UG-27(c) and UG-32(d), respectively, as measured to the root of the thread for each component?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): Since Section VIII, Division 1 does not have rules for the design of the threads for the
closure described in Question (1), shall the MAWP of closure assembly be determined in accordance with
U-2(g)?
Reply (2): Yes.
Volume 62 (7-1-12) starts here
Subject: UG-140(a) (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File No.: 09-888
Question: For vessels to be used exclusively for air service, steam service, or water service, under
conditions where the source of pressure is self-limiting, may the overpressure protection requirements of
Section VIII, Division 1 be met via system design in accordance with UG-140(a)?
Reply: Yes.
Note: This interpretation was inadvertently omitted from Volume 61.
Subject: U-3(a), Mandatory Obligation to Observe Other Standards (2007 Edition, 2009 Addenda)
File No.: 09-859
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, U-3(a) to use the edition
year of SNT-TC-1A as listed in Table U-3 for recertification of NDE personnel?
Reply: Yes. See UW-54(c).
Subject: Appendix 2, 2-14; UG-99(b); UG-99(c); and Interpretation VIII-1-07-52 (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-1236
Question: In satisfying the provisions of Appendix 2, 2-14, is it required to calculate the flange
rigidity for hydrostatic test condition with test pressure established as per UG-99(b) or UG-99(c)?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-119, Nameplate Marking (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-779
Question: Is it permitted for a pressure vessel nameplate to be marked with a pressure range as the
MAWP rather than a single value?
Reply: No.
Subject: UCS-85, PWHT of Mechanical Test Coupons (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-937
Question: A pressure vessel shell made of P-No. 1, Group 2 carbon steel that has been normalized
by the mill is used to construct a welded pressure vessel subjected to postweld heat treatment in
compliance with the rules of UCS-56 during fabrication. Are the additional requirements for mechanical
property testing prescribed by UG-85 and UCS-85 applicable to this material?
Reply: No. See UCS-85(f).
Subject: UW-18(d), Base Metal and Filler Material (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-1139
Question: In UW-18(d), does the “material being welded” only refer to the base metal?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: U-2(a), User Approval of Drawings (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-747
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 that drawings by the
Manufacturer shall be reviewed and approved by the user who establishes the design requirements for the
pressure vessel?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-116(f)(1), Postweld Heat Treatment (2010 Edition)
File No.: 11-745
Question (1): A pressure vessel is constructed to Section VIII, Division 1, and does not require
postweld heat treatment per UW-10. However, if postweld heat treatment is carried out on this vessel in
accordance with the requirements of UW-40 to satisfy a customer requirement, may the letters HT be
applied under the Code Symbol as addressed in UG-116(f)(1)?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A pressure vessel is constructed to Section VIII, Division 1, and does not require
postweld heat treatment per UW-10. However, if postweld heat treatment is carried out on this vessel in
accordance with a procedure that satisfies UW-40, except for the minimum temperature and hold time as
required in Subsection C, to satisfy a customer requirement, may the letters HT be applied under the Code
Symbol as addressed in UG-116(f)(1)?
Reply (2): No.
Question (3): If PWHT is not required per UW-10, but is carried out to satisfy a customer requirement,
is it required to record the heat treatment time and temperature in Line 6 of Form U-1 or Line 7 of Form
U-1A per Table W-3, Note (27), regardless of whether or not the heat treatment performed satisfies UW-
40?
Reply (3): Yes.

Vol 62 Jan 2013 Starts Here
Subject: UG-99(e), Maximum Allowable External Pressure (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File No.: 11-1606
Question: In accordance with the provisions of UG-99(e)(1), when pressure chambers of

combination units havebeen designed to operate independently and be hydrostatically tested as separate
vessels (each chamber tested without pressure in the adjacent chamber), is it permitted by the rules of
ASME Section VIII, Division 1 that the hydrostatic test pressure in one chamber acting as external
pressure on the common element may exceed the maximum allowable external pressure of such common
element?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-130, Certification Mark (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File No.: 11-1699
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, UG-130, that the Certificate
of Conformance Form UV-1 or UD-1 is to be delivered to the customer who purchases the pressure relief
device from the Manufacturer or the Assembler?
Reply: No.
Subject: Appendix 17, 17-1(a)(2) and 17-7(a), Performance Qualification Requirements for
Welders per Appendix 17
File No.: 05-661
Question: Do performance qualifications meeting the requirements of Section IX, QW-197.2
qualify a welding operator to use Laser Beam Welding (LBW) to deposit lap joints using a WPS qualified
under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1, Appendix 17, 17-7(a)(1)(b) for welded assemblies
constructed under the provisions of 17-1(a)(2)?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-51(b)(3), Aligned Indications (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File No.: 10-1710
Question (1): A group of aligned indications in a radiograph have an aggregate length less than t within
a weld length of 12t. Are these indications acceptable, regardless of the spacing between them?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): A group of aligned indications in a radiograph have an aggregate length greater than t
within a running weld length of 12t, and the spacing between any two of these indications exceeds 6L,
where L is the length of the longest indication within the group of indications under consideration. Are
these indications considered acceptable?
Reply (2): Yes.
Subject: Part UNF, UG-24(a), and Appendix 7, Aluminum Castings (2010 Edition, 2011Addenda)
File No.: 11-1856
Question: Is Appendix 7 applicable to aluminum castings?

Reply: No; see UG-24(a)(1) through (4).
Subject: UG-37 and UG-40(b), Limit of Reinforcement (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File No.: 11-1866
Question: A shell nozzle is located near a cone–cylinder junction such that the limits of
reinforcement, as defined in UG-40(b), extend into the adjacent cone. Is it allowed to consider the excess
thickness of the cone, excluding the thickness required for reinforcement of the cone–cylinder junction,
within the limits of reinforcement as available area in the nozzle reinforcement calculations required by
UG-37?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UW-16(f)(3)(a)(5), UG-36(c)(3)(d), and Fig. UW-16.2, Fitting Diameter (2010 Edition,
2011 Addenda)
File No.: 12-345
Question: When meeting the requirements of UW-16(f)(3)(a)(5), the spacing requirements of UG-
36(c)(3)(d) need to be met. Under UG-36(c)(3)(d), the diameter of the adjacent openings, d1 and d2, are
defined as the finished diameter. Where the standard fittings are inserted through the vessel wall and
attached per Fig. UW-16.2, sketch (K), is the diameter d1 and d2 considered to be the inside diameter of
the fittings (i.e., coupling)?
Reply: Yes.
Vol 62 Jul 2013 Starts Here
Subject: Review of Filter Press Interpretation VIII-1-92-164 (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 10-949
Question: Not applicable.
Reply: Not applicable.
NOTE: On July 13, 2011, this Interpretation was withdrawn. Please refer to Interpretation VIII-1-07-43.
Subject: Mandatory Appendix 22 and UG-92 (2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda)
File: 10-325
Question (1): A Manufacturer produces forged vessels in accordance with Appendix 22 from steel
stock on through to a stamped vessel. He provides the Inspector with a certificate of physical test results
and heat treatment. If so requested by the Inspector, must he make available to the Inspector the heat
treatment procedure and furnace charts for the heat treatment required in Appendix 22, 22-4, and SA-372
by reference?
Reply (1): Yes, see UG-90(c)(1).
Question (2): A Manufacturer produces forged vessels in accordance with Appendix 22, purchasing
forgings completed through the required heat treatment. The Manufacturer completes all required
inspections, tests, and examinations thereafter and stamps the vessel. He provides the Inspector with a
certificate of physical test results and heat treatment. Must he produce and make available to the Inspector
the vendor’s heat treatment procedure and furnace chart [as detailed in Question (1)] if so requested by
the inspector?
Reply (2): Yes, see UG-90(c)(1).
Subject: UG-32(e) and Mandatory Appendix 1, 1-4, Stress Conversion (2010 Edition, 2011
Addenda)
File: 11-1898
Question: Is it the intent that the given tensile strength of 70,000 psi and the allowable stress, S, of
20,000 psi be converted to 485 MPa and 138 MPa, respectively, as done for the example in Mandatory
Appendix 1, 1-4, Footnote (1)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-11(c), Required Documentation (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 12-370
Question: Is it the intent of UG-11(c)(5) that ASME product standard parts that are made from plate
do not require a Material Test Report as would be required by UG-93(a)(1)?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: UG-140, Manufacturer’s Data Reports (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 10-46
Question: If, in conducting the required analysis to identify and examine all potential overpressure
scenarios in UG-140(a)(2), it is determined that one of the credible causes of overpressure is not self-
limiting, is it permitted by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 to use overpressure protection in
accordance with UG-140(a)?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-119(c)(1), Nameplates (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 12-326
Question: Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, UG-119(c)(1) that the
complete name of the Manufacturer be shown on the nameplate in letters that are not less than 5/32 in. (4
mm) high?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: Code Case 2591, Plate Material for Welded Construction (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 12-423
Question: May UG-15 be used to qualify a material specification or grade/type/class/condition, etc.,

that has been approved for use by a Code Case when the alloy is not approved for use in Subsection C for
any product form?
Reply: No.
Subject: UCS-85(f) and UG-84(f)(2), PWHT Exemption (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 11-83
Question: In UG-84(f)(2), does the reference to UCS-85 and the included provisions of UCS-85(f)
allow the weld metal and HAZ impact test specimen sets removed from the weld test coupon to be impact
tested without applying simulated heat treatments representing PWHT below the lower critical
temperature?
Reply: No.
Subject: UW-51 and UW-52, Radioscopic Examination (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 12-2007
Question: May real-time radioscopic examination (Section V, Article 2, Appendix II) be used to
satisfy the requirements for radiographic examination of welded joints specified in UW-51 and UW-52?
Reply: Yes.
Subject: U-2(a) and UG-125(a)(2), Designated Agent (2004 Edition, 2006 Addenda)
File: 06-1248
Question (1): Does ASME Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(a) [including Note (4)] require a Manufacturer
of vessels for stock to be a “designated agent”?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Does UG-125(a)(2) require a Manufacturer of vessels for stock to size, select, or provide
relief valves with the stock vessels?
Reply (2): Yes, provided the Manufacturer assumes the responsibility of the user.
Question (3): Is it required by the rules of ASME Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(a) for the user to
designate a “designated agent”?
Reply (3): No.
Subject: UG-125, Liquid Service on Safety Valves (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 11-1707
Question: May a Section IV HV-stamped liquid service temperature / pressure relief valve be used
to protect a Section VIII, Division 1 pressure vessel from overpressure?
Reply: No.
Subject: UG-32, Formed Heads; UG-34; and UHA-44 (2004 Edition)
File: 11-1571
Question (1): Does ASME Section VIII, Division 1 (2004 Edition, 2005 Addenda), UG-32(a), footnote
18 allow Mandatory Appendix 1, 1-4 to be applied to formed heads with proportions where r is less than
6% of the skirt outside diameter and less than 3 times the head thickness, but with L/r less than 162/3 (i.e.,
heads of other proportions)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Per UG-32(j), does the term head thickness refer to the required thickness calculated per
UG-32(e) or (f), as applicable?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Does U-2(g) allow the design and acceptance of a formed head that is not of the type
defined by UG-32?
Reply (3): Yes.
Subject: UHA-32, PWHT P-No. 7 (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 12-346
Question (1): When non-load- or non-pressure-bearing attachments are welded to a corrosion-resistant

weld metal overlay that is not considered for strength in the design calculations of a pressure vessel, are
the attachment welds subject to the PWHT requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When load-bearing structural attachments are welded to a corrosion-resistant weld metal
overlay that is not considered for strength in the design calculations of a pressure vessel, are the
attachment welds subject to the PWHT requirements of Section VIII, Division 1?
Reply (2): No.
Subject: UG-37(g), Split Reinforcement Pads (2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda)
File: 13-115
Question: Is the compressed-air and soapsuds test mandatory for split reinforcement pads?
Reply: No.

Asme Section Viii, Division 1 Interpretations

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Asme Section Viii, Division 1 Interpretations

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ASME SECTION VIII, DIVISION 1 INTERPRETATIONS

NOTE: THESE INTERPRETATIONS ARE FOR ASME COMMITTEE USE ONLY.

WARNING: THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN

TO GET A PRINTED COPY OF AN INTERPRETATION, FIRST HIGHLIGHT

Question: With reference to UW-51(a)(3) is it permissible to qualify radiographic personnel in

Reply: It is not the intent of UW-51(a)(3) to permit qualification of radiographic personnel by

Question: Does the following meet the intent of the Code?

Reply 3: Negative. [See also UW-11(a)(2)]

Question 5: In UHT-5(a) it refers to "complete radiographic examination" in accordance with UW-51.

Question: Is pipe, procured in accordance to a specification in Section II for use in nozzles in a

Question: Is it permissible to exceed the permissible out-of-roundness of cylindrical shells under

Reply 2: Although it is recognized that hardness is a factor in tube-to-tubesheet design, it is

Question 2: In Table UA-002, is rolling required to be done prior to welding?

Question: In nonmandatory Appendix A to Section VIII, Division 1, is it necessary to achieve 1.4t

Question 1: If a Material Manufacturer furnishes a plate to a Manufacturer of a vessel for Section

Reply 2: Current requirements of Section V, Article 2, T-262.1 only recognize SE-142 as an

Question 1 and Reply 1: See Interpretation VIII-77-89, Question 1 and Reply 1.

Question 2: Who is the "responsible manufacturer" referred to in UG-129(c)(2)?

Question 4: If a manufacturer furnished to a user an assembly consisting of pressure vessels, piping,

Clarification Issued: May 16, 1978

Question: Is it acceptable for a material supplier to transfer information from a Material

Reply: A material could be produced to some other specification and be qualified as an SA

Reply: We agree with the above interpretations of UW-3.

Reply (2): No. See answer to question (1).

Reply: Yes. See also UG-16(c).

Reply (1): No.

Reply (2): No.

SA-334 be used for tubes in such a vessel?

Reply (1): No. See UG-20(b).

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (2): Yes.

Reply (3): Yes.

Reply (4): Yes.

Reply (5): See UW-33.

Reply (1): Yes. See UG-36(c)(3).

Reply: No. See UG-5(a).

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (2): No.

Reply (4): This shall be recorded in accordance with Instruction 20 of UA-1030.

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (2): No.

Reply: Yes. See Note 5 to UW-16(g)(3)(a).

Reply: A5= (Dp - d - 2tn) te as indicated in Fig. UA-280.

Reply (1): No.

Reply (2): Yes.

Reply (2): No.

Correction Issued: August 14, 1978

Reply (2): Yes.

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (3): No.

Reply (2): Yes.

Question: U-1(g) of Section VIII, Division 1 states in part:

Question: A vessel Manufacturer contracts an outside firm to perform radiography required by

Reply (2): No. See UG-125(h).

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (1): Yes.

Reply (2): Yes.

Reply (3): Yes.

Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of UG-15 are satisfied.

Question: Is it permissible to weld nonpressure attachments to a Code stamped Section VIII,

Reply (2): No. See Reply (1).

Reply (1): No.

Reply (2): Yes.