There are no requirements for a documented system of welder continuity. The contractor is responsible to ensure the welder has no lapse in excess of six months using a particular welding process for which the welder is qualified. Notice, only the use of the process is required, there is no requirement that the welder deposit any particular weld type nor is there a requirement that the weld be deposited in accordance with any particular code.

The New Farm Code requires every weld be examined visually. The need for additional NDE is restricted to connections subject to cyclic loads that are in tension and even then, not all connections are subject to the tension loads requiring NDE. That being the case, a contractor could be in business for many years and never encounter code mandated volumetric NDE. Further, the welder's welds may never be subject to NDE.

The client's demands are not supported by the New Farm Code unless the client includes the requirement in the project specifications. Should the client press the issue, and assuming the requirement is not in the project specification, the contractor is entitled to the costs incurred to requalify the welders. The costs would include the cost of testing, labor, and lost profits that would have been earned had the welders been employed producing production welds.

The client should be able to locate the requirements being imposed by the New Farm Code. Good luck, it isn't in there.

Best regards - Al

Welcome to the Forum Neelen @!

Please allow me to translate:   "New Farm Code" means  AWS D1.1 2015

The rest of the text above is good guidance  :)

If the client did not specify anything "exceeding" D1.1 welding requirements, you have a good argument to use your welder.

WELCOME TO THE AWS WELDING FORUM!!

As previously noted, the customer and/or their engineer is totally on their own on this one.  There is no justification in the code to insist on such action and expense on the part of the fabricator/erector.  As Al stated, (paraphrased) Money Talks.  Tell them they will be responsible for the added costs of re-qualification of welders and work loss during the re-testing of already qualified people with an estimate of the charges unless they can justify their actions with code clause quotes and/or agreed upon contract documents that state that the welders had to have a specific log with specific information of work done a specific way contrary to code requirements. (if it was in the contract the fabricator/erector signed then it is valid even if the code doesn't back it up.)

There are no documents required and all the fabricator has to do is state orally or in writing that the welder has welded and has had no lapse in employment and/or welding related work exceeding 6 months.  Many maintain a log of sorts or just proof of continued employment which is no more than a running list of welders with all their qualifications dated/reviewed for accuracy every six months.

Some people take this clause totally overboard and insist on things that are not specified in the codes.  Position, joint configuration, weld size and/or length, and many other things are not an issue, only use of the process within each six month period since qualification.   

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day,  Brent