Can the 4 metal container manufacturing plants under the company share welding procedure qualification?
Thread Content
Experts, clause 4.3 of NB47014 stipulates that \"welding procedure qualification shall be carried out within the organization itself.\" The equipment and instruments used for welding procedure qualification must be in proper working condition; the metal materials and welding materials shall meet the relevant standards, and the welding tests shall be carried out using the company’s own equipment by welders with proficient skills within the company. In order to maximize all of the company’s resources, we plan to integrate the welding procedure qualification processes across our various factories. I would like to consult the experts regarding the following question: 1. Can the 4 pressure vessel manufacturing plants under my company share the same process qualification? If it is for shared use, is it acceptable to use the company name in the welding procedure qualification report? Since the locations of each factory are all within the same city, the company’s welders receive standardized training to obtain the necessary certifications, and the condition of their welding equipment is similar across the board. So I feel that aside from “this unit,” all the other conditions are the same. Can the “relevant entity” here be represented in the name of a company? 2. If the welding procedure qualifications are all carried out in the name of the company and can be shared by all its branch factories, will this have any impact on the pressure vessel qualification renewal certificates and the acquisition of such qualifications for each branch factory? Because one of the branch factories has the qualification to manufacture pressure vessels of grades A1-A2-A3, while the other branch factories have grade A2 qualification. Are there any requirements for these assessment aspects in obtaining the qualification for pressure vessels? For example, must the name of the evaluating unit be identical to the one specified in the \"Pressure Vessel Qualifications\"? I would be extremely grateful if the experts could provide their valuable opinions!
It depends on the nature of your four branches. For example, in the case of branch BB under company AA, it can be understood as several branches sharing a common technical team, quality assurance system, and so on. In such a situation, it should be fine to use AA Company’s name for the welding evaluation. If the names of your four branch companies are Company A, Company B, Company C in City X respectively, and each company has its own independent system. Is it also applicable in other various audits and certifications (such as 9000)?
I was not involved in the system review and certification processes; the quality assurance department has a comprehensive quality system, while each factory has its own detailed quality system. The company’s overall framework focuses on management tasks, while the branch factories are responsible for implementing the specific quality systems. In terms of names, for example, if our company is called AA, it has Plant 1, Plant 2, and Plant 3. The individual names for each factory are Factory 1 for AA Company’s equipment, Factory 2 for AA Company’s equipment, Factory 3 for AA Company’s equipment, and so on.
Yes, the requirement is that it be the same legal entity with a set of management systems.
Thank you for all your valuable suggestions. Are there any further additions?
If the branch factory is not an independent legal entity, it is possible
For the same legal entity and the same quality assurance system, weld evaluation reports can be shared. That’s how our company is – it can pass any inspection
For the same legal entity and the same quality assurance system, weld assessment reports can be used interchangeably
Obviously not; weld procedure qualification needs to be carried out at the same fixed location.
Hello, Antarctic Flame. When conducting weld evaluations, does the name used need to be the same as that in the quality assurance manual? For example, the warranty manual lists AA Company, while the name of the branch factory is AA Company Equipment Plant No. 1. So, should the name in the evaluation report use “Company AA” during the evaluation?
Is there such a rule at the same fixed location? The process evaluation carried out by construction company A at location A can also be applied to BC