United States Nuclear Power

Federal Regulations, Codes, & Standards

Users Group ©

OM Meeting Notes - September 2000

Site Updates


Prepared By: Louis Lake

Company: Proto-Power Corporation

Meeting Dates: September 18 - 20, 2000

Meeting Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado


Meeting Notes

Attended the following sessions:

1. Subgroup ISTB (Pumps) Monday, September 18, 2000

2. OM Subcommittee Tuesday, September 19, 2000

3. OM Main Committee Wednesday, September 20, 2000



The Subgroup OM-22 (Check Valves) did not meet.

The Subgroup ISTC (Valves) only met briefly for personnel issues.


Subgroup ISTB (pumps)

A white paper (new subgroup Item #P00-04) was presented on Preservice Test requirements after maintenance. This paper clarifies the confusion on the term "baseline". The Code should no longer refer to the term "baseline"; and the Code should reference only preservice testing. In addition the paper clarifies that the preservice test conducted when the pump is initially placed in service for the first time (after new construction, significant modifications, or pump replacement) is what has been considered a "baseline" and it does not makes sense to "baseline" a pump that is inservice. Also Code changes are recommended that clarify the preservice "baseline" testing requirements; that establish a rational method for implementing preservice testing at operating power plants; and that precludes forced outages solely to perform post-maintenance testing. Also proposed are Code changes that postpone the preservice test and allow a group A test or comprehensive test to be performed when it is not practical to perform a preservice test. A preservice test will be performed in an operating mode when it is practical. Action on this white paper will be taken at the next meeting.

Action on ROM #99-04, Code change for smooth running pumps (pumps with low vibration). This item was closed. There are few utilities with this issue and the Code acceptance criteria facilitate the acceptability of smooth running pumps.

A draft Code interpretation was presented by Louis Lake on the requirements of the OM Code, 1995 edition/1996 Addenda, ISTB 4.3(e)(1). When performing a pump comprehensive testing the reference values are required to be within 20% of the pump design point. The question asked was is it the intent of the Code that the reference value be 20% of the design point if practical? After extensive discussion, the committee agreed that the Code intended that the reference value be within 20% with no provision for practicality. The purpose of the comprehensive test is to test the pump as close as possible to accident flow and may be performed in an operating mode where grater flow can be obtained. For older plants, when system design does not allow the higher flow to be obtained, a relief request will have to be submitted.


Subcommittee OM Code (SCOMC)

This was the first meeting under the new organization as a Subcommittee. The chairman, Richard Favreau from TVA, also was acting secretary. The chairman indicated that he would continue as acting secretary until further notice. The membership of the committee was reviewed along with information on the selection process. The new organization along with committee reporting relationships was included in the agenda. Basically all of the old working groups became subgroups reporting to SCOMC, which in turn reports to an OM Main Committee. The OM Main Committee is the only consensus committee.

Those subgroups reporting to the SCOMC are ISTA, ISTB, OM-10/ISTC, ISTD, ISTE, Appendix 1, OM-8, OM-19, and OM-22.

The first two priorities for each subgroup are; 1.The resolution of Code Revisions and Code changes (listed as ROMs), and 2. The resolution and closure of Code Inquiries (listed as OMIs).

Action item that received significant discussion included OMI 00-07, interpretation on the requirements of Oma-1988, Part 6, Paragraph 5.2 and Paragraph 6.1. At issue is that during the performance of pump inservice testing failure to establish pump reference flow rate or differential pressure may occur. Is it a requirement to declare the pump inoperable? The following answer passed (17 to 5); "No! Oma-1988, Part 6 does not address instances when the conditions of Paragraph 5.2b have not been met. However, determination of pump operability is the responsibility of the owner". Those voting negatives (including the NRC) felt that this should be addressed by the Code, and that the intent of the Code is to declare the pump inoperable when reference values cannot be established during inservice testing until an evaluation determines otherwise.


OM Main Committee


1. The next NRC/ASME IST Symposium will be held in 2002.

2. The next OM Code meeting will be held January 8 to 10, 2001 in Clearwater Florida. The hotel is tentatively the Clearwater Hilton. After contract terms are completed, more information will be provided.


NRC Report:

1. Revision to 10CFR50 to adopt the 2000 Edition of the OM Code is being processed. Final approval is expected in 1 to 2 years.

2. Revision to NUREG 1492 has been started. This revision will bring the NUREG up to date with the 1998 Edition/2000 Addenda of the OM Code.

3. A B&W Risk-Based Topical Report on AOVs is currently being reviewed and RAIs have been issued. The NRC is planning a public hearing for the end of October.


Actions Taken:

1. The following definition of "Performance Based" was passed: "Code, Standard, or Guide that allows different test methodology, allows a decrease or requires an increase in testing sample size or frequency, based on the values of measurable parameters which monitor SSC performance".


RI-IST information:

There are three OM Code Cases issued that cover RI-IST and there is one Code Case being processed that covers AOV/HOV.

There is a RI Code Case being processed by the ISI subcommittee to cover repairs/replacements/modifications.

RI-IST has been adopted by the following utilities:

1. Oconee

2. Davis Besse

3. Comanche Peak

4. San Onofre

5. Sequoyah

Home Page


Copyright Disclosure