Well I’ve got to raise my hand because I’m also one of those who’ve allowed his certs to expire.
Specific to Rick’s case though, the lack of current certification is nothing compared to the individuals lack of integrity! Did the individual really make technical mistakes or were they mistakes being made by an exempt and inexperienced inspector!
Once I retired from my career company, I didn’t want to quit doing what I really enjoyed prior to retirement so I continued to provide part-time contract consulting and inspection services. The problem arose as I came due to renew my CWI certs last April. Since retirement and during the last three years of part-time work I’d only been working 300-500 hrs/yr. As per the requirements of QC1, 12.2.1, I couldn’t honestly show two years of activity during the last three years. If I’d had the two years worth, it would have taken me up to my 2nd, nine year certification and I would not have let it lapse.
The interesting thing about the renewal and recertification process for me was that nobody required or cared if I was a CWI. I changed my resume to read that I “had been certified until April 2002” but at present I was “certifiable”! What they did care about and found value in, was my 38 years of welding and QA/QC experience.
I will agree wholeheartedly that if a client requires an individual to have current certs that’s fine but sometimes there’s a point being missed. The point missed is that we, as experienced and trained individuals, don’t empty our heads as you would a wastepaper basket when we aren’t working! Look at the common codes and standards of construction we work with, none that I’ve worked to require an individual to be a CWI, not even the good old AWS’s D1.1 as stated in 6.1.4.1 (1)(2)(3).
Granted, there has to be a time for all of us individually when we lose our edge and lose step with the technology advances due to in activity in our field. Then it’s time to hang it up.
The key, as I see it, has to do with verification! Not unlike the verification process we use in determining a welders ability to produce sound welds and meet minimum spec requirements. If a client is knowledgeable enough to hire us, they should be knowledgeable enough to verify that we are performing to his expectations! That means a client would need to have a quality assurance process by which to verify the inspectors performance. Heck, he’s hiring an inspector to perform either a QC or QA process that verifies a welders ability, why not do the same thing with an inspector? This shouldn’t be a problem but from my experience, it certainly can be. I’ve personally witnessed NDE Techs with CWI certs perform thickness testing 40 hours a week for three years that had no problem with renewing their CWI certs! I’ve also witnessed a CWI/API510 inspector that did the same thing and had no problem with his three-year renewals either and this guy didn’t know the difference between a PQR and a WPQR when he had one in each hand!
In the end, what does a current certification really provide a client? In my opinion, darn near nothing except it shows the individual at some point in time passed a test! To me, it only gives him a license to inspect the first production weld and nothing more and then only if he gets past my interview!
The bells of wisdom ring loud and speak true once again Mike. We have had several conversations surrounding this entire ordeal. The gentleman with the expired certification is the same guy we have talked about in the past. ( 100 % N2 Purge gas for 254 smo) We were able to finally coordinate a meeting with all parties earlier this month. When the x-ray film was presented for our review, there were 11 cracks that were either incorrectly identified or not even reported at all. Several of the cracks were intrepreted as "IP"; but, as I put in the other post, how does IP turn into a transverse indication?
The intent of this post was to find out what course of action should be taken against someone who is obviously not complying with the code of ethics for CWI inspectors.
I have found out from outside sources that his gentleman will issue procedures and certifications to anyone who "shows him the money".
As client rep, I have required several of these guys to retest on site and not one has passed. ( mostly IP nearly 3/4 around a 6" coupon) How is it that the day they tested at the shop they made a perfect weld with x-ray film and all ?
If it looks like a rat...smells like a rat.......must be a rat. Only this rat has a stamp that in the eye of the beholder means he is an expert in his field.
Mike,
About the 510/CWI person... That is a very common thing these days. I can name about twenty 510 inspectors that don't know the difference between a graham cracker and a cat-cracker but they have the cert.
Once again they took thickness readings on vessels for three years, went to a high profile training course that teaches the test and presto ! Instant API Inspector !
On that subject, keep in mind :
" The API examination is a measure of a candidate who barely meets the minimum education and experience to become an entry level inspector "
That is a quote from thew API website.
Just my three cents worth....
apiguy
I get a little more of the picture with each new post. I guess the only question is, Is the guy intentionally misrepresenting himself or does he not know any better? Either way the Code of Ethics states that all inspectors have a responsibility to the health and well being of the public. You also have the responsibility to act with integrity; to be fair and honest in your dealings but also not to allow wrongdoing that you are aware of.
I think the sooner you take the matter to a higher level, the sooner it can be resolved and you'll be free of it. The good part of a committee is the members are not personally affected by the outcome (or shouldn't be, anyways). They also will have public safety, integrity, and professionalism in mind.
The down side is that you could have an enemy for life (if you don't already but you know that). The up side is the guy could realize he's made some mistakes, do what he can to correct them, and become a valuable colleague.
Hope all works out ok.
CHGuilford
To me, the main thing here is the fact that the guy used a CWI stamp to which he is not entitled to use. AWS should require CWI's that let there certifications expire, to surrender their stamps back to AWS.
You should file a complaint to AWS using the form, and let them handle it from there.
Yes the guy is still an inspector. NO he is not a current CWI nor is he entitled to use a CWI stamp. As a current CWI, It makes me upset to see someone who is not entitled to the stamp use it. A CWI is something you earn, and if you value it, you try to keep it. I do agree that it is expensive if coming out of your own pocket, and circumstances could prevent one from afording to renew. BUT IF THIS GUY HAS ANY ETHICS ABOUT HIM, HE WOULD NOT BE USING THE STAMP AFTER HIS CERTIFICATION EXPIRED!
So please, do all of us who earned the CWI and maintain it the favor of filing a complaint.