I am not aware of anything prohibiting it, but it could be considered a conflict of interest. I wouldn't recommend it.
My manager has also asked me to inspect my own work, and that of the the welders that work for the company. I am asked to write reports as to my findings. There is no conflict if the owner of the welding project and the EOR are informed prior to the start of work . With disclosure the report is as good as your reputation. Conflict comes in when you get paid for the same work by two different entities, or when you hide the truth. See AWS QC1:96 8.4
I am writting a report today for repair welding where I personally went out to the job site and witnessed some of the worst welding possible. I made the repairs necessary to meet code requirements myself. The issues were size and undercutt. I have been asked to write a report to the effect that all welding done by my company on this project is now in compliance with the code. It will be written on company letterhead with me as the repair welder.
I never like these situations because they can be viewed as self serving. However I tell it like it is and hide nothing. The report is then worth whatever those that use it say it is worth.
According to the AISC's new standard (I don't know if this applies to your shop) we established a procedure that states that none of our inspectors will inspect their own work. We did this because of the following...(I realize that this is specifically talking about production personnel, but we made the procedure to fit all personnel to avoid sticky situations like that)
Item #13 Inspection and Testing
Paragraph 13.1 Assignment of QC Inspections and Monitoring[condensed version :)]
......personnel shall be assigned to inspection duties under the following conditions:
....They do not inspect their own work.
Check your shop's QC Manual to make sure there isn't any wording like I have described that would prohibit a CWI's inspection of his/her own work.
John Wright
I think the bottom line is objectivity; is it possible to remain objective while inspecting ones own work? I mean, after all, if one has made a weld and then left it for inspection, deeming it suitable for inspection, why inspect it at all?
jon,
I guess if you looked at it from one perspective it would be OK to give yourself a welding test and pass yourself and then sign all the documentation yourself.
Then the other perspective would be...how does this look to someone on the outside looking in and sees this type of documentation? I think that type of practice would raise more questions than if the QC welded it and then assigned inspection duties to someone and have them sign off as inspecting the weld(provided that the person assigned met all of the criteria spelled out in the AISC's standard for experience, knowledge, etc...).
John Wright
Hello All:
Something’s may not be required to be written down. Example; nowhere in my QA program does it say not to eat yellow snow. The bad joke aside, something like this can bring down a companies reputation pretty quick if something should happen. When dealing with ethical issues, I've been taught that even the appearance of impropriety is as bad as the actual deed. Welder and inspector as the same person is not a good idea. However, how about the Employee and raise approver!! Now that has possibilities.
Regards, Donnie Mann
Check the commentary in AWS D1.1 ie; C6.1.2....."Verification inspection should be performed independantly by personnel whose primary responsibility is quality assurance and not production."
Looks to me like it is in "black and white"
Roger
The Commentary is not part of the Code so it really isn't black and white but rather a clarification of the Committee's thoughts. One cannot enforce the commentary section. Personally, I think it's not a smart thing to do inspecting one's own work, like I said before, why bother?
Back to the original question. Is it legal and written down in black and white, for a CWI to inspect his or her own weld? I think it is because of what I sated above. Disclosure of who you are and what you did puts all of the facts on the table. The determination of what value such a report has belongs to whomever it is that uses the report, and to who accepts it. If they are the legally responsible parties and they ask for a report from you and you supply it with all of the facts, it's no conflict.
Too the point of ethics, I don't like to write such reports but I also don't always want to go to work. I get paid to do what my employer asks me to do and as long as it is not illegal or immoral and I can do it in good conscience that's what I get paid for. I don't get to make the rules.
If your QC Manager says No and he has documentation to say the same, then No. A brain surgeon is qualified to do brain surgery, but does that mean he can do brain surgery on himself? I don't think it's illegal, just a little unethical and maybe impractical. How did you like that example, Jon??? ;-)
Loved it Chuck! Many codes will stipulate ....."Verification inspection should be performed independantly by personnel whose primary responsibility is quality assurance and not production." (or similar verbiage) as pointed out by Roger, but I will STILL go back to my point: if you, as the welder, completed a weld and were later asked to inspect it, it would seem you were "done" when you walked away from it so why bother inspecting it later and, perhaps most important, how objective can one be when examining their own work? One of the MAJOR points in performing ANY inspection is objectivity.
gollestad; if your QC Manager said no CWI can inspect their own welds, why do you want to disagree? Remember, there are often "requirements" that cannot be found in Codes or Standards (specifically) this does not make them any less requirements....
Hey Buddy,
I agree with you. I guess the original post is asking if there is anything written that says you can or you can not. Actually, the first line of inspection is the welder regardless of any certifications. You are right, a welder should never walk away from a weld until he is completely satisfied that his weld is done to the best of his ability. But if that welder is a CWI also, he should be able to go one step further and sign the necessary paperwork IF and only IF he can be objective and unbiased. All of that would depend on is character and his commitment to be totally unbiased and objective. Arguements can be made in either direction. It's been 20 years, but didn't we all have to take an oath of some kind regarding character and the such when we got our CWI license. I can't remember what it said exactly since I have filed away all of that material, but it seems we took some sort of "ethics" oath or agreement to be fair and unbiased and stuff like that. I cannot remember it saying we could not inspect our own welds. Do you have that information?
I am harder on myself than anybody else has been or ever will be.I will criticize the mistakes I make long before someone else gets the chance too. But if I choose to weld on a job in my shop someone else will check the weld behind me.I will not check my own welds.
But all that is a mute point seeing how I am the only one at my shop that has any idea how to certify a welder and I am not going to certify myself.
Better yet how do you find time to weld anyway.
I am not saying that I agree or disagree, just like find it write or wrong in any AWS document.
AWS D1.1 provides guidance to what the D1 COMMITTEE OPINION is/was in the Commentary, as was mentioned earlier, the reason this sort of thing is NOT in the body of the Code is exactly the same reason that a mandatory CWI for inspection types is no longer in D1.1 body (as it once was), those reasons are far too lengthy to discuss in this Forum but one can probably take a couple of guesses...
Chuck, Lighten up on us ethical types. I don't do brain surgery and I don't accept my own inspection reports. I do however prepare full disclosure documents when they are requested.
The principles of conduct for a CWI are contained in QC1 96 an AWS Standard for Certification of Welding Inspectors. You must adhere to it's principles of conduct to maintain your certification.
Acceptance is in the hand of the beholder. Check out QC1 96 Section 8.4.4 Even an elected official can accept his or her own work if all parties concerned are in agreement. Full disclsure = no conflict.
I had a customer's QA inspector in today. He wants a QA report on the welding we are doing for his project. He saw me with a welding hood on my head and asked if I do layout and fitting and welding. The answer is yes to all three. Me and the other 8 guys. Are you working on my project? Yes. I answered. He also wanted to see my AWS CWI wallet card. He commented that I had just gotten my 9 yr. renewal. He said to report in writting when the project is complete.
Shall I not give him the report he requested? Should I disqualify myself and my training? Should I hire an outside inspector to do the QC and the report?
It only takes one. Seeing how it is not written in the code as you say then not checking your own work is in the gray area. Then it comes down to a matter of opinion. You can have 20 EOR think it is ok to check your own work and then 1 shows up and says it will not happen. How much money will it cost when that happens.
If you think it won't happen that way. There is a welder in my shop that has been welding everday since he was certified in 1993.My company has been submitting the same welder qualification report since 1993 to the EORs.Last week it was sent back from an EOR because he did not like how it was filled out. The welder qualification report was fine for about a thousand EOR but wrong for one.So who was wrong? In my opinion the EOR is being picky but I still have to make it right.
So just because you get away on Monday that does not mean you can get away with it on Friday.
Oh and by the way it did not come to my attention until the building is up(as in furniture is all that is missing on the inside).I do not want to see the price tag on this.
Sorry, didn't mean to offend you. Like you, I was just voicing my opinion. I thought that was what this forum was about.
I wasn't offended. I was telling the truth. I don't do brain surgery. I do a mean BBQ though.
There have been a lot of replies on this topic, most with similar points of view.
I am not aware of anything that specifically states that a CWI cannot inspect his/her own work. In fact every person making a weld is expected to do just that.
Now, acceptance of that work is another matter. If the work is under the AISC Quality Certification program, then (as 1st mentioned by another poster) Policy #30 applies; which basically says that FINAL inspections (meaning acceptance inspections) are to be performed by someone else. That 'someone else' must also have the appropriate traing and/or experience.
Other codes may have similar restrictions.
Going a bit further, AWC QC1-88 (I don't have the current version handy) addresses "Conflict of Interest" in 8.4.
8.4.1 says to avoid conflict of interest and to disclose any circumstances of potential conflict. There is more good reading in there that helps in understanding the intent.
But the bottom line is that it is very hard to prove that inspections are thorough and objective even when someone else performs inspections. That is why customers sometimes send in their own QA inspectors.
It is even harder to defend an inspection if the same person performed welding and inspection on the same item.
Chet Guilford
Chet, You said very eloquently what I have tried to say. QC1 96 Sec 8.4 says exactly what you just said. Full disclosure = no conflict. The entire ethics section has to do with telling the truth. I have it in my hand right now.
Acceptance has to do with using the documents as presented, if they allowable in the discipline you indorse or are constrained by. I have seen content requirements for reports but I have yet to see an acceptance criterion for reports except in QC1 96 section 8. The criterion there is TRUTH!
Apart from the AISC QC program (which does not allow it for finals) there are governmental agencies that may have their own set of rules regarding approval of fabricators which precludes this practice.
Let's take the case of the City of Los Angeles B & S for instance. Information bulletin P/BC 2002-032 Section B.2a reads "Applicants for approval as fabricators of high-strength structural steel shall exhibit the
following qualifications:
a. An established quality control group separate from production supervision. "
source: http://www.ladbs.org/faq/info%20bulletins/building%20code/IB-P-BC%202002-032%20High%20Strength%20Steel.pdf
For what it's worth I'll throw in my 2 cents. Unless you are a one person shop it's not worth the hassle it could create. Example: If I were an outside inspector going into a shop just to do a random product quality audit and not really looking for anything specific and I found out that an inspector was doing production work and accepting/inspecting their own work, chances are very good that I would want to know where every weld this person made so I could take a look.
To me it just doesn't seem worth the hassle it could create.
Just my thoughts,
Brian J. Maas
Brian,
I think most of us agree with what you are saying, but the question is still whether there is anything in writing that specifically says YOU CAN or YOU CAN NOT inspect your own welds. Either yes there is, or no there is not. It's been over 20 years, but I seem to recall where there was a standard (maybe QC-1) that talked about the character and responsibilities required of a CWI. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems there was something that addresses the integrity and conduct of CWI's.
Chuck
Here is QC1-96 There is a long list of ethical statements but I saw nothing that speaks to this thread :)
Funny how that works eh?
http://aws.org/certification/qc196.html
Not offering an opinion on this one, just gonna watch and learn. I've offered more of those than is good for me lately.
Sheesh.... has this topic gone full circle yet? This could wind on for days and days.... obviously 2 sides to the question and many answers both for and against.
Ok lets look at it this way.You are the best welder on the planet and a CWI. You weld it and you pass it.That means you think a CWI can check his own welds.
Now you have the worst welder on the planet and also a CWI.He/She runs an obiviously bad weld but does not have time to fix it.So he/she thinks what is one bad weld gonna hurt whose gonna know.
If I choose to check a weld that I welded(which I will not do),I am believing it is ok for the other CWI to do it.
Now you have a good CWI and bad CWI, both checking thier own welds.
If you say it is ok for them to check thier own welds, that means you would not have a problem with placing your child under the beam being held up by the weld that the bad CWI checked.
Before y'all scream there are no bad CWI's. Also no bad cops no bad teachers no bad welders and no bad politicians(just kidding on that one all of them are bad)
OK, this might be a stretch, but I'll run it by everyone and see what you all think.
AWS D1.1:2004 6.1 Scope
Section 6 contains "all" of the requirements for the inspector's qualifications and responsibilties, acceptance criteria and procedures for NDT.
Note that since it doesn't say that the welder and inspector can't be the same person anywhere in Section 6, so therefore if "all" of the stipulations etc.. are in Section 6 and none of us can find anything to the contrary...well?
John Wright
like an all day piece of bubble gum, John! :-)
Are you trying to say that it has now lost it's flavor?
John Wright
I have always been told I could add to the code but not take away from it. The code book says you are allowed 3/8" porosity, I can say you are allowed none in my shop. Is it legal for me to do that? Yes it is.
Which is the same thing the QC Manager at the shop did that started this discussion. He simply added to the code and nothing he added was detrimental to the code. So it is perfectly legal. He needs nothing in writing in the code book to enforce it all he needs is to be in charge and be given the right to make the rules.
I'll go a step further with my opinion (not that it's worth much).
If all parties, customer, engineer, fabricator, the boss, etc., are fully aware and approve of the situation, and IF there is nothing in the contract or specs to indicate otherwise, a welder could inspect and accept his/her own work. The ethics requirements demand full disclosure but do not outright prohibit the practice.
That said, I don't believe it's a good idea in most situations; we all know the reasons why.
Chet
I for one agree with your opinion.
Dennis
If everyone involved says it is ok(that does not mean I think it is right)for a CWI to inspect his/her own work,then so be it.But if one person involved says no to it,then it will not happen.
I agree with the fact that the code does not say you cannot inspect your own welds,but it also does not say you can inspect you own welds.
Here we have the gray area of the code. If I never inspect my own work then I never have to wonder if the next EOR will see it my way.
An EOR will never say to me "Why don't you inspect your own work? It would be more like "What makes you think you can inspect your own work on my job?"
By -
Date 10-05-2005 22:13
Gollestad's original post regards a CWI inspecting his/her own welds. We are speaking then of an AWS Certified Welding Inspector. AWS QC1-96 is the document that “establishes the requirements for AWS certification of inspection personnel. It describes how personnel are qualified, and the principles of conduct and practice by which certification may be maintained. Any oral or written claim of certification under the guidelines established herein shall be made only by those individual SCWIs, CWIs, and CAWIs who are, at the time of the claim, current and in compliance with all sections of this standard”. The above comes from paragraph 1.1 of QC1.
Section 8 of QC1 is the Code of Ethics for AWS certified inspectors, and it describes the principles of conduct required of AWS certified inspectors, as noted in paragraph 1.1. In paragraph 8.2.4, it states that the AWS certified inspector must “be completely objective, thorough, and factual in any written report, statement, or testimony of the work and include all relevant or pertinent testimony in such communiqués or testimonials”. When a weld is inspected, the inspector must somehow or other report his/her judgment as to the acceptability of the weld. It would seem impossible to be “completely objective” in this reporting when inspecting one’s own work. This by itself would put an AWS certified inspector in a position where he/she is not “in compliance with all sections” of QC1, i.e. he/she is not being completely objective.
As an AWS CWI, you must adhere to all applicable sections of the QC1 standard, and the Code of Ethics applies to all. Do not inspect your own work.
Mankenberg
gollestad; if you continue in the inspection business long enough, you will see many things that are not to be found in black and white within codes or standards. Some of these will be based upon good practice, others may be based on engineering evaluation and still others may be customer or regulatory requirements.
As I'm sure you see from the above discussions, there is a clear division in peoples thoughts however many lean toward the lack of objectivity as I do. My very best advice to you, is to follow the direction given by your manager, who should have considerably more experience than yourself in these matters.
Hi Kip!
thanks for CLARIFYING this question!!! As you represent the AWS with regards to these matters, then your explanation of the code of ethics in QC1 must be respected in order for one to remain in compliance as an SCWI, CWI, CAWI!!!
Again thanks for reassuring my own opinion on this question Sir!
Respectfully,
SSBN727
Run Silen ... Run Deep!!!
Hi Kip,
I usually agree with your take on subjects posted in the past. Not this time.
Objectivity is a function of removing emotion and opinion from a discussion and using "only the facts", as Joe Friday would say. Your statement "It would seem impossible to be “completely objective” in this reporting when inspecting one’s own work.", is an opinion. I support your right to have and express your opinion.
I think that most of the time it is possible to be completely objective. When one is harassed and pushed it is more difficult. The jobs where you are treated as necessary part of the completion of the project tend to cause one to be more helpful. Both situations must be carried out without compromise.
Complete objectivity is certainly a thing to strive for and quite an accomplishment if achieved by a mere mortal.
Please take this response as a complement.
Dennis
By -
Date 10-07-2005 17:49
SSBN,
Though I am on the B1 committee, I am not on the Qualification and Certification committee so therefore in no way do I represent AWS on this. As Dennis Scholtz pointed out, I am strictly expressing my opinion, so my statements should not be taken as to represent an official position.
Dennis,
I agree with your views on objectivity, and that is exactly why I have the opinion that I have. Though I strive for complete objectivity in everything I inspect, and though I believe I actually do achieve complete objectivity in everything I inspect, my opinion is that it would be impossible to convince all other conceivable interested parties of my objectivity were I to be inspecting my own welds. Now, I cannot weld so I do not personally face this particular ethical dilemma (were I to inspect my own welding I would immediately have to invoke paragraph 4.2.5.3 of QC1).
My point is, however, that as an inspector my knowledge and integrity are all that I have, and I will guard my integrity jealously. I learned this the hard way as a young inspector. As noted by yourself and many others in this thread, nowhere does AWS say, "Thou shalt not inspect thine own welds". What AWS has in writing puts this particular situation squarely into the category of 'gray area'. My opinion on this is therefore on the conservative side - I will do whatever it takes to protect my integrity. My recommendation is that any inspector should protect his/her integrity, and that is why my opinion is "do not inspect your own welds".
Best regards,
Mankenberg
Kip,
I agree with you on this,the committee you are on means nothing to me.Seems to me some people think that no one should question their integrity.Some people need their integity question and that is just part of life.
All you have to do is look at the Police Department. If a cop drives drunk does he/she pull over and write himself or herself a ticket? Internal Affairs is only around to keep an honest cop honest.You will always have bad cops regardless.
We as CWI's in a straight forward way do not have an Internal Affairs to keep us in line.All CWI's need to do their best not to do something to make other CWIs look bad.
I am not calling anyone a bad CWI.You do not have to do anything wrong technically to give someone a bad impression.Then that person tells someone and so on and so on.
If you think I am wrong just look at the Los Angeles Police Department.All of the cops on the LAPD cannot be bad but ask the majority of the citizens in LA what they think.
Hi Kip!
Thanks for clarifying that also...
I still agree with your opinion anyway...
As far as the "Intent" of the code of ethics is concerned, the message is clear even though it is not written word verbatim!
Respectfully,
SSBN727
Run Silent... Run Deep!!!
