FIFTH CANADIAN CONFERENCE ON NONDESTRUCTIVE ... - IAEA

- 293 -
These figures are much more than an exciting and encouraging indication
of the Foundation's growth and its established reputation. Student
enrolment in these types of programs, conducted by the Foundation,
grew from a total of 115 in 1977 to 758 in 1983 - an increase of 559%!
Furthermore, the C.S.N.D.T. Foundation is not the only NDT educator in
Canada. Companies run their own in-house educational programs, equipment
suppliers offer NDT courses, and C.S.N.D.T. Chapters have continued
with their evening courses. There is, very definitely, an increase
in the recognition of the importance of educating NDT personnel.
In Figure 1, note the changes in the enrolment figures for Regular
Courses and In-Plant Training Programs between 1981 and 1983; a decrease
in attendance at Regular Courses and a dramatic increase in
In-Plant Training Programs.
There has also been a change in the students' training objectives
since 1981. Prior to this, I estimate that 80% of the students in any
of these programs were preparing for C.G.S.B. certification. After
1981, there has been little change in the training objectives of students
in Regular Courses, but a decrease to approximately 50% of the
students in In-Plant Programs who are preparing for certification.
Many of the companies now contracting with the Foundation to teach "onsite"
are providing their employees with a general knowledge of nondestructive
testing. These are not necessarily NDT technicians; they
may be engineers, marine surveyors, procurement inspectors, quality
assurance managers, quality control managers, production superintendents
and foremen - all of whom are representative of the disciplines which
must inter-relate with the actual NDT personnel in order to ensure an
economical, quality product. The increase of programs of the "need to
know" type, as opposed to the "how to do", underlines the growing
recognition that knowledge of nondestructive testing is essential to
the decision makers.
I am not advocating, nor am I suggesting, that there has been a swing
away from the certification of NDT personnel. To the contrary, Canada
has one of the best certification systems in the world, and if more
companies would require C.G.S.B. certification in their inspection
procedures, at least, we would be assured of the minimum level of
competence of their NDT technicians. We are well aware of the ramifications
of a nondestructive test improperly performed or improperly
interpreted.
Then why aren't more of us, who know nondestructive testing and understand
our responsibility for the welfare and safety of the Canadian
public, demanding that all NDT technicians be educated and trained in
specific applications, and their knowledge verified? In order to ensure
top quality, professional and ethical technicians, we need:
- a responsible employer
- a receptive trainee
- a responsible educator
- a responsible regulatory body
AND
- a responsible, professional National Society