Level II UT per ASNT

Date 09-12-2012 16:18

Depends on what does your company NDT certification manual requires.

To comply with AWS D1.1 NDT work: Certification of Level I and Level II individuals shall be performed by a Level III individual who has been certified by:
1. The ASNT
2. Has the education, training, experience, and has sucessfully passed the written examinations described in SNT-TC-1A.

By 803056

Date 09-14-2012 03:33

Only SNT-TC-1A contains the weasel words that permit the employer to write a written practice that includes certification by anointment. Still, the employer does not have the last word on the subject. The customer purchasing the services of the "lab" has an obligation to review and approve the written practice, NDT procedures, and certification of the NDT personnel that will be performing the NDT services. If the customer is sharp and understands how NDT personnel are qualified and certified they will promptly reject the written practice as submitted.

I tell my clients to insist on qualification and certification in accordance with CP-189. CP-189 is a standard that delineates the minimum requirements for qualification and certification. It is not a recommended practice as is SNT-TC-1A. CP-189 requires the Level III to be tested and certified by ASNT. It eliminates a lot of the monkey business permitted by SNT-TC-1A.

Best regards - Al

By eekpod

Date 09-14-2012 10:29

I always wondered why ASNT allowed that and am surprised it hasn't been changed and removed in this day and age.

By 803056

Date 09-17-2012 21:11

If your lab is set up for SNT-TC-1A and your customers know no different, why make life more difficult than it has to be.

It is the same arguement many companies use when they are asked why they do not certify their welders to AWS or ASME. They have an established customer base that does not require certification.

Best regards - Al

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 09-17-2012 23:45

It may be a bit of a stretch, but doesn't it amount to the same thing when D1.1 allows inspectors to be called 'Welding Inspectors' even when they are not AWS/CWI's? Especially for a small company to call someone their QC person with a certain amount of experience, skills, and knowledge carries the same weight as a UT inspector qualified by a level III to his own in house standards that come short of 139.

And, depending on the work they are allowed to inspect, they can hone their skills while not endangering anyone.

Welders also. In house certifications meet many needs. Just not all. Some contracts call out stricter specifications for inspectors, NDT, and welders and also specify they be tested by an outside agency to a specific code for qualification. But, as you said, when not specified, and customers don't know or it doesn't really affect their work, why not?

I guess though Al, I take a little different approach to the answer of that. I feel it is just a better gauge of me and my employee's to have the correct certs completed by an outside source to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that we are up to the task. And, if a bigger, more restrictive code job comes along, we are already qualified to do it. No playing around trying to get everything taken care of while starting production on the job. And I feel the same about many of the NDT certs as well. I want the ones that really mean something to anyone truly interested in my qualifications.

Just my two tin pennies worth.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By 803056

Date 09-18-2012 02:39

From a personal stand point I agree with you Brent, but the question was why ASNT still uses SNT-TC-1A.

Some companies like to be able to qualify and certify their own people with minimal outside influence. Some companies will go the extra mile to set themselves apart from the herd.

Best regards - Al

By CWI555

Date 09-18-2012 11:17

Other companies will sprinkle holy water on an employee and call them level II's and III's.

By greek

Date 09-14-2012 14:16

Thanks for the info :cool:

By Bill M

Date 09-18-2012 15:08

Remember that SNT-TC-1a is only a "Recommended Practice". and is a guideline for the establishment of a qualification and certification program.

They intentionally use the work "Should" instead of "Shall", but not for the purpose of weasel words, but to allow the employer to develop a written practice that is appropriate for the employers circumstances and applicaitons.

Like the document or not, it is still pretty much the industry standard and still referenced by AWS D1.1, and the ASME BPV Code for the qualification of NDT personnel.

I think one needs to closely audit the NDT suppliers, review the certification program, and make a decision if they are qualified to do NDT on your projects.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 09-18-2012 17:05

And in reallity Bill you head the nail on the head for every aspect of this rather welder, NDT, or CWI. The customer/engineer really needs to do their homework and make sure the fabricator and/or inspector is qualified for the job at hand. Next time around they may need a different one because the need is different. But it is obvious that often it doesn't happen that way.

I run into fabricators/erectors who have no business on certain jobs. But there they are. The same with inspectors. Personally, I try to stay away from jobs I am not familiar with the codes for. But sometimes we get thrown into the mix with little time to review and brush up on a code. That really puts us in a bad situation.

And to their credit, I have been called on several jobs lately by 'Inspections' Companies who did not have a CWI on staff but the job they were on specified the inspector to be a CWI. Rather than try to push their own guy through or not say anything till it was too late, they called me. Kept everybody happy.

This should all be the case with the OP and how their policy reads, what their needs are, and just know that sometimes you may have to hire outside resources to meet an occassional need that would be too expensive to satisfy in house on a full time basis.

Have a Great Day, Brent