I agree with you, however, in my case, the VT qualification should be limited to welding inspection only
Look a this:
Inquiry 89-7
In reference to the SNT-TC-1A (1984 Edition), we want to know if the words “should” and “shall” have a specific definition. If these words have a specific definition, what is the scope of each?
Response
No. The words “should” and “shall” do not have a specific definition applicable to the 1984 Edition of SNT-TC-1A.
The implied intent of these words initially was that “shall” was used to express the importance of a particular function or activity to be considered by an employer in the written practice, whereas “should” was intended to denote a suggested or recommended function or activity which could or should be considered for inclusion in an employer´s written practice.
A conflict in the intended usage of these two verbs was introduced by a regulatory body which interprets the words “shall” and “should” when used in their code as “shall” meaning mandatory and “should” being preferred.
To further clarify ASNT´s position on the use of these words in the context of SNT-TC-1A, the 1988 Edition of SNT-TC-1A now defines “shall” and “should” in Section 2.1 as
(8) Shall: a verb used to express the minimum recommended guidelines for most employer´s qualification and certification programs; this is intended to express what is mandatory by law or regulation.
(9) Should: a verb used to express the desired guidelines for most employer´s qualification and certification programs.