SNT written practice - clarifications

Date 06-09-2009 04:01

Lets address one thing at a time.

A CWI is not qualified by virtue of the CWI to certify LII visual personnel. http://files.aws.org/certification/docs/b5.1-03.pdf If it were an SCWI there is an arguement that could be made based on the same document.
Refer to table 1.

B31.3 Don't have 04 with me, this is out of 06 so you need to verify language.

342 EXAMINATION PERSONNEL
342.1 Personnel Qualification and Certification
Examiners shall have training and experience commensurate
with the needs of the specified examinations.(note 1)
The employer shall certify records of the examiners
employed, showing dates and results of personnel qualifications,
and shall maintain them and make them available
to the Inspector.
note 1:For this purpose, SNT-TC-1A, Recommended Practice for Nondestructive
Testing Personnel Qualification and Certification, may
be used as a guide.

By this language it does not directly require SNT-TC-1A.
B31.3 does make another modification to this statement that is often overlooked.
343 EXAMINATION PROCEDURES
Any examination shall be performed in accordance
with a written procedure that conforms to one of the
methods specified in para. 344, including special methods
(see para. 344.1.2). Procedures shall be written as
required in the BPV Code, Section V, Article 1, T-150.
The employer shall certify records of the examination
procedures employed, showing dates and results of procedure
qualifications, and shall maintain them and make
them available to the Inspector.

That is for the procedures, and the specific methods tie back to section V as well.
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.

It's not just the opening statement in TC1A that you have to satisfy. All caveates as found in section V also apply.

If the level III is PT, MT, RT, the standard LIII does satisfy the intent and requirements for those methods.
Where I see a problem is in the visual.

Regards,
Gerald

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 06-09-2009 14:10

Question: The written practice required by SNT-TC-1A shall or should be written by a Level III or per company's QA/QC responsible? in any case shall follows the SNT-TC-1A it selft isn't?

Well here is what I think, please correct me if any1 sees it different (studying for my LVL III)
5.0 Written practice
5.1 The employer SHALL establish a written practice for the control and administration of NDT training.
5.2 The employers written practice should describe the responsibility of each lvl of certification …………ect………..ect……………..
5.3 the employers written practice SHALL describe the training , experience and examination of each LVL of certification.
5.4 the employers Written practice SHALL be reviewed and Approved by the employers LVL III.
5.5 Written practice SHALL be on file.

So in 5.1 the employer writes a written practice this could be anyone QA/QC , as long as a LVL III revews and approves it as stated in 5.4.

You must remember that SNT-TC-1a is only a recommended practice and is very flexible, with many things to be considered.

its best if you get a copy and reasearch this fist hand.

MDK

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 06-09-2009 15:10 Edited 06-09-2009 15:14

Mike

I would like to add that you should look at paragraph 1.4, which has not changed since the beginning in 1966 (or Whenever). This gives you license to do whatever you want, however you want, official interpretations not withstanding.. Now, if you do whatever you want, - or even if you follow SNT-TC-1A to the letter, the customer does not have to accept your written practice.

When I run into someone who quotes an official interpretation that I don't like I tell them to FO. If that paragraph 1.4 didn't mean exactly what is literally says, the pertinent committees should have changed it a long time ago. FEm and the horse they rode in on, Etc, and their mother! I have made quite a liberal use of this paragraph!

Most of the time, in fact only once, did someone challenge my own written practice, and they lost the argument with me, because they didn't know SNT-TC-1A and in fact didn't even have a copy of it.

It has been my personal crusade to get qualifications to SNT-TC-1A declared as fraudulent. I know that will offend a lot of people, who act ually were legitimately trained, got the required experience and were properly and legitimately tested. However, those will be only one in a hundred, or maybe one in a thousand, so I could easily apologize to those relative few.

Central Certification is the way to go!

Joe Kane

By flamin

Date 06-09-2009 15:38

Joseph,

What do you mean, exactly, by "Central Certification? I'm trying to get the ball rolling for my certification in PT. Most of the specs our jobs reference is SNT-TC-1A, is there a better or more credible certification one should persue that would still cover SNT-TC-1A ?

Thanks for your time.

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 06-09-2009 18:51

ACCP Level 2 & 3, stands for ASNT Central Certification Program

Also there will be a new AWS PT certification (CWI Plus) We will be holding the BETA Exam soon.

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 06-09-2009 16:55 Edited 06-09-2009 16:57

I knew i read that, but i could not find it. So basicly 2 different written practices from 2 different companies could produce VERY different skill levels in NDT personel.
Both holding the same LVL of certification. It seems to flexible at times.
Its almost not fair that one NDT tech may have a large amount of skill and experiance and at the same time the other may have only a fraction of what the first tech has.

Central Certification are you refering to ACCP? or something else?
Question.........
To recieve a lvl III in CP-189 you must hold a LVL III from snt-tc-1a correct?
MDK

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 06-09-2009 19:07

Mike

Two legitimate SNT-TC-1A documents could give you wildly different personnel qualification skill levels.

Any number of the phony SNT-TC-1A documents and their associated programs could give you the world.

Fraud in SNT-TC-1A qualifications is second only to concrete testing fraud in the construction industry. (In my not so humble opinion.)

"Last week I could't spell inspectioner, Now I are one!" "Its almost not fair..." AWW poor bebe!

Oh! Boy! I just love to take on SNT-TC-1A fraud! He he he he he he he he he he!

SNT-TC-1A actually has it's place for in house training after Central Certification to some basic or intermediate level, but in it's present state and in the way it is most often presently used, it is mostly a cover for fraudulent training records, fraudulent work history and fraudulent certifications.

Joe Kane

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 06-09-2009 18:07

Maybe you can point this out to me....
Visual exams
Whos responsibility is it a LVL III ?
Can this be deligated to a represenitive of the LVL III ?
If any1 has any info on this please let me know where to find it in the recomended practice.
MDK

By cremx

Date 06-09-2009 17:29

Dear Mike,
That´s help me a lot, I did not look at point 5.4

In my case, the employer´s written practice is not approved by a Level III to begin with it

The employer presented for review the inspector´s certificate for VT Level II issued by employer´s Level III, however the employer´s Level III is not qualified for VT. This situation is not in compliance with last paragraph of SNT-TC-1A point 4.3.3

The employer´s written practice stated the following:

"It is Level III and CWI responsability for the training and testing of the Level I and II personnel that performs visual inspection of welded assemblies"

By mroach

Date 06-22-2009 23:38

cremx, I'm getting a little lost here as to where the qualification question is? Is it the qualification of the individual doing the work or the qualifications of the individual qualifying the individual to do the work? The SNT-TC-1A is a recommended practice which is outlined pretty straight forward in section 1.0 Scope. As for the employer's written practice, it may very well have been approved by the employer's approved NDT Level III or more commonly refered to as appointed Level III. There are many applications out there that do not require central certification. Section 4.3.3 states " The NDT Level III should have general familiarity with other appropriate NDT methods, as demonstrated by an ASNT Level III Basic examination or by other means. (The terms "should have" and "by other means" opens a lot of doors.) "The NDT Level III, in the methods in which certified, should be capable of training and examining NDT Level I and II personnel for certification in those methods." Then Section 5.4 " the employers written practice shall be approved by the employers NDT Level III." So when you go back to 2.0 Definitions, 2.1.1 Certification: written testimony of qualification. and 2.1.2 Certifying Authority: the persons or persons properly designated in the written practice to sign certifications of the behalf of the employer. The employers written practice, depending on the companys needs, may very well appoint a CWI as a company Level III and qualify a Level I or II. I tend to agree with JPK that the companys Level III should have a central certification, that would settle all arguments. The bottom line is what does are the code or specification require for an individuals qualifications? MR

By cremx

Date 06-23-2009 07:28

The fact is:

1. I requested a pipe examiner qualification/certification to comply with ASME B31.3 requirements
2. The employer provide me a VT certificate in accordance with SNT-TC-1A-2001
3. The VT certificate is signed off by a Level III
4. I verified the Level III certifications at ASNT website, the Level III (who qualified the examiner) is not VT certified
5. I requested the employer's written practice; this WP is not approved by a Level III and specify that for VT, a CWI and Level III will qualify and certify VT Level IIs
6. I rejected the WP; the employer provides another WP approved by the same Level III
7. Look at this http://www.aws.org/cgi-bin/mwf/topic_show.pl?tid=21506

By mroach

Date 06-24-2009 11:28

Okay so the governing code is ASME B31.3. Bear in mind it has been that I haven't used ASME code for some time so I can not look up particular paragraphs. I believe some where in there the code clearly defines the levels of qualification and the qualifying authority. If this person had not written their their in house practice to comply with these requirements, then shame on them. As for certification, the Level III can only certify a Level I or II test method that the Level III is also certified in. This person should know that. Best of luck MR.

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 06-24-2009 13:53

cremx,
I am a little bit confused.
B31.3 states that SNT-TC-1A-2001 "may" be used as a guideline.
Not "should" and definitely not "shall".
Why are you demanding that this company must comply with SNT-TC-1A-2001 when B31.3 certainly doesn't require it ?
Regards,
Shane

By cremx

Date 06-30-2009 00:02

Shane,
The "contractor" (manufacturer, fabricator and erector) is providing me a VT certificate as evidence of QUALIFICATION of their VT examiner.

In terms of B31.3, I requested the VT examiner QUALIFICATION; they respond with the VT technician CERTIFICATE based on the SNT-TC-1A and signed off by a external LVL III who is CWI also.

Further investigation, the LVL III is not certified as LVLIII for VT; then I requested the written practice and found that for the VT personnel training and qualifitacion a LVL III or CWI will be responsible.

So, everything is according to contractor´s written practice; so my question came when per SNT-TC-1A responsabilities definition, the LVL III can only training and examining NDT LVLs I & II in the methods that LVL III is certified.

Under the contractor written practice´s scheme; the contractor´s written practice take precedence of the SNT-TC-1A.

Then, Why LVLIII certifies a VT LVL II when he is not certify as VT LVL III?

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 06-30-2009 03:17 Edited 06-30-2009 03:20

Cremx,
ASME B31.3 Interpretation 15-21
Question (1)
Does ASME B31.3 1993 Addenda paras 342 and or 344.2 require that personnel performing visual examinations required by paras 341.4 and 344.7 be qualified and certified in accordance with SNT-TC-1A Recommended Practice for Nondestructive Testing Personnel Qualification and Certification ?

Reply (1) No

Question (3)
Does ASME B31.3 1993 Addenda paras 342 and 344.2 permit that the visual examinations required by paras 341.4 and 344.7 be performed by personnel that (1) meet the physical requirements of ASME BPV Code, Section V, Article 9, (2) are competent to perform visual examination in accordance with the manufacturers written procedures and (3) the employer certifies and makes available records of the examiner which show dates and results of qualifications ?

Reply (3) Yes

Based on the interpretation above there is nothing wrong (in accordance with B31.3) with the qualifications submitted to you.
Where they have stuffed up is having any reference to SNT-TC-1A on their procedures. Just get them to remove the reference and change it to ASME V, Article 9 and everything should be fine,
Regards,
Shane

By cremx

Date 06-30-2009 04:55

Shane, thanks a lot for your clarifications¡¡¡