Gerald,
Just trying to stick to the quoted code. B31.3. No edition was listed, so I'll use 04.
328.6 Weld Repair
A weld defect to be repaired shall be removed to
sound metal. Repair welds shall be made using a welding
procedure qualified in accordance with para. 328.2.1,
recognizing that the cavity to be repaired may differ in
contour and dimensions from the original joint. Repair
welds shall be made by welders or welding operators
qualified in accordance with para. 328.2.1. Preheating
and heat treatment shall be as required for the original
welding. See also para. 341.3.3
341.3.3 Defective Components and Workmanship. An
examined item with one or more defects (imperfections
of a type or magnitude exceeding the acceptance criteria
of this Code) shall be repaired or replaced; and the new
work shall be reexamined by the same methods, to the
same extent, and by the same acceptance criteria as
required for the original work.
344.2 Visual Examination
344.2.1 Definition. Visual examination is observation
of the portion of components, joints, and other piping
elements that are or can be exposed to view before,
during, or after manufacture, fabrication, assembly, erection,
examination, or testing. This examination includes
verification of Code and engineering design requirements
for materials, components, dimensions, joint
preparation, alignment, welding, bonding, brazing, bolting,
threading, or other joining method, supports,
assembly, and erection.
344.2.2 Method. Visual examination shall be performed
in accordance with the BPV Code, Section V,
Article 9. Records of individual visual examinations are
not required, except for those of in-process examination
as specified in para. 344.7.
(least anyone get any bright idea about not recording individual weld exams for VT the finished joint is listed under 344.7)
344.7
(f) (for welding) slag removal and weld condition
between passes
(g) appearance of the finished joint
There is a marked difference between the requirements of 31.3 and 31.1.
My interpretation:
Unless the EOR has specified something other than Base 31.3 requirements, repair by grinding is not permitted by this code. (see quotes 328.6 and 341.3.3)
Care must be taken here for the following reasons;
There is nothing in B31.3 prohibiting "work in progress dressing of the weld". However; if it's been turned over "officially" for inspection, anything found to be defective per
"Table 341.3.2 Acceptance Criteria for Welds and Examination Methods for Evaluating Weld Imperfections" would have to be repair "welded" per the requirements of Para. 328.6. (341.3.3 "shall be repaired or replaced") (328.6 "Weld Repair: A weld defect to be repaired shall be removed to sound metal. Repair welds shall be made using a welding procedure qualified in accordance with para. 328.2.1, recognizing that the cavity to be repaired may differ in contour and dimensions from the original joint. ")
Up until the time the weld is "officially" turned over to inspection, there is no code based specific instruction other than using a qualified WPS and welder for making the weld.
This is were experienced foreman and welders come into play. If that welder/forman or anyone other than the inspector notes undercut in excess of whats allowed by code before inspection turnover, *there is no prohibition that I can find for blending it in as long as min wall is not violated, a smooth transition is maintained, and any variables for welding are not violated.
In my opinion, this is the reason for a "clear and concise to all" understanding of 'at what point the weld is turned over' is needed.
Production owns that weld until it's turned over except for matters specifically addressed in para 344.7 which leaves plenty of room for interpretation.
If production turns that weld over "officially" and it contains anything that can be rated as a "defect" There is no option given by the code alone for anything other than repair by welding in B31.3 04 edition. Conversly, if it's found "in process", removal of the stress riser by grinding is not prohibited. Therefore if it was removed prior to 'official turnover' by grinding it was in process per *, no undercut/riser exist, the inspector has no basis for reject and the weld passes visual.
That all may sound chicken SH**, but the inspector does not have the option to insert common sense or opinion and must stick to documented requirements. If production doesn't understand that, it's their problem, not the inspector. Bottom line is, it is what it is when it's turned over to inspection. Production has considerably more leway to put a handle on these problems, but they have to recognize it for what it is first.
My opinion and interpretations for what it's worth
Gerald