Signature required on WPS's

Date 01-18-2011 15:19 Edited 01-19-2011 01:35

This is my opinion on the subject of signatures;

The WPS and supporting PQR (if needed) are legal documents. Nearly every welding standard has provisions to the effect that the manufacturer is responsible for the work they produce. That includes development of welding procedures needed to support their welding operations when it is required by the welding standard invoked by the customer or by law.

The company may be utilizing prequalified WPSs if they are permitted by the welding standard, they may have WPSs supported by one or more PQRs, or they may be utilizing a SWPS, all depending on what the welding standard requires or permits. The signature signifies the manufacturer/fabricator/erector/installer (have I missed anyone?) accepts responsibility for their documentation. If there is no “John Hancock" on the paperwork indicating it has been reviewed and accepted by company, i.e., if they don't accept responsibility for the document, why should I accept it?

A welding document that has no signature could have been written by anyone, including the janitor or the Chief Executive Officer. I want to see a signature of someone that is authorized to act on behalf of the company in such matters. I am not willing to accept documentation for a controlled process from anyone that just happened to be in the office that morning.

Best regards - Al

By eekpod

Date 01-18-2011 15:28

Thanks guys for your thoughts.
I guess I'm looking for page and line in D1.1, and am wondering if it was changed from what I remember.

I could have sworn it said it needed to be singed by the author, but when I coulndt find it in section 3 (prequalified WPS's) that got me thinking maybe its only for WPS's that are qualified but when I skimmed through section 4 I didn't see it mentioned. SO I went back through 2008 and didn't see it there, so maybe it was from earlier 2006.

I ask because we are subbing some work out, and I am reviewing thier WPS's and they are not signed, thats what got me going.

Chris

By 803056

Date 01-18-2011 15:37

Any legal document needs the signature of someone that is authorized to sign paperwork on behalf of the company.

Electronic signatures are acceptable now for most documents.

The absence of a signations is like the company saying, "I don't want to accept responsibility for it."

Some sample forms I've seen have a space for a signature at the top, others at the bottom, but I do not recollect ever seeing a sample form without a space for a signature.

Most welding standards are not going to list the need for a signature on a legal document because that is like telling you to remember to breath. It is understood in the business world and it is expected.

Best regards - Al

By js55

Date 01-18-2011 17:44

There is no requirement in D1.1 or ASME for WPS's to have signatures. PQR's yes, WPS's no. But I would agree with Al, its good idea.

By ctacker (****)

Date 01-20-2011 19:43

Look in annex N, under N1. commentary on the use of WPS , "WPS and PQR are to be signed by the aurthorized rep of the Manufacturer or contractor"

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 01-20-2011 20:20 Edited 01-20-2011 20:25

Man, looks like Al's logic had more merit than even he knew. And to think all any of us needed to do was read all applicable parts of D1.1. And, all the forms I have on my computer and the ones I have seen samples of in ALL of AWS documents (D1.1, B2.1, Professional's Advisor on PQR's, etc) all have a space at the top for 'Authorized by:'. Many times their name is just typed in but I would now suggest to my customers that they sign the official shop copy that is kept in permanent files. Even if they sign over the typed name. Keeps a copy on the computer that can be emailed to whoever requests it and gives the legal signature on file.

'Always read the notes and the commentaries.' Seems like that was drummed into us at the seminar when I first took my exam for CWI.

Sometimes we get in a hurry and miss the one important point we were looking for.

Thanks Ctacker. Another point of information to be tucked away for future usage. Seems like I have been asked to help develop quite a few WPS's lately too so this will be most valuable.

Does bring me to an additional question in this discussion, I have seen many WPS's developed by a third party (such as a CWI) that had the CWI's stamp and signature on the bottom just to document who put it together and probably because they thought it would add weight to the correctness of the WPS for the contractor and whoever they submitted it to. I understand Al's point as to his desire that the contractors main responsible personnel have done the research and work to put the WPS together, but, if they are going to seek outside assistance because they don't understand all the blanks and essential and non-essential variables, etc, is there a reason to, or not to, put one's stamp on the form? Maybe so the engineer at least knows who to call if they have any questions about any of the how's and whys of a particular piece of information contained in the submitted WPS?

Have a Great Day, Brent

By js55

Date 01-20-2011 22:04

Annex N is not mandatory.

By Skaggydog (**)

Date 01-21-2011 17:35

Now, they have a reason for D1.1:2015.

By eekpod

Date 01-21-2011 19:42

Well I'm glad I remembered it from somewhere, I just never had time to wander to the commentary.
I agree the commentary is not part of the code. I'm thinking I probably mis understood the signature requirement for PQR and just automatically applied it to WPS, but anyway now I have a page and line.
BTW I do sign my WPS's and stamp them.
Thanks everyone for the help and input.

By ziggy

Date 01-25-2011 22:15

Both of AISC's Steel Erector certification checklists (CSE and ACSE) contain this question: "Are written welding procedures (signed by the responsible company representative) in close proximity to and used by the welders?"

The signature of a "responsible company representative" would seem like a foregone conclusion. A question that comes to mind if the WPS is not signed is "Why not?" If a "responsible company representative" is unwilling to sign the WPS, what is the problem?

The signature is one thing, making sure that the WPS is being followed is another. Perhaps that is why the 2006 D1.1 (and all subsequent editions) rewrote clause 6.3. Whether or not a "responsible company representative" chooses to sign the WPS, the "contractor's inspector shall ensure that all welding operations are performed in conformance with the WPSs..."

So, if a WPS is not signed off on, does the inspector note this a a "non" conformance in the welding operation? That might depend on the contract requirements, the engineer's requirements, the fabricator's quality procedures for nonconformances, et al. Then again, what is more critical, that the WPS is signed or that all welding operations are performed in conformance to it?

ziggy