12th MEETING OF INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE
September 10, 1976

MEMBERS PRESENTEVRARD, M. (President)
AZOU, P.
BOBBIN, J.
BOSSELAAR, H.
BOWE, E.
BOZICEK, B.
De STERKE, A.
DEPUTAT, J.
De MEESTER, P.
GORSKI, V.V.
HAUK, V.
HAVERCROFT, W.E.
HORNUNG, R.
HOUBOVA, A.
HOMES, G.
HOLMGREN, B.
JUNGHEM, A.
KONKOLY, T.
KOPINECK, H.J.
LUND, S.A.
MANNA, P.R.
MIKHEEV, M.N.
NARDONI, G.
OBRAZ, J.
RAMIREZ-GOMEZ, F.
RETI, P.
SCHARPE, R.
SCHUMACHER, R.O.
SILBER, A.
SINGHANIA, OM.P.
SIPEK, M.
SKORDEV, A.
STANGER, H.
TENNEY, G.H.
WALTER, J.C.

FranceFranceUSA
Netherlands
CanadaYugoslavia
Netherlands
PolandBelgium
U.S.S.R
FRG
CanadaSwitzerland
Czechoslovakia
Belgium
SwedenSwedenHungary
FRG
Denmark
India
U.S.S.R
Italy
Czechoslovakia
Spain
Hungary
United Kingdom
FRG
Austria
India
Yugoslavia
Bulgaria
United Kingdom
U.S.A
NorwayAt the beginning of the meeting, the President welcomed the Indian56

representatives, attending the meeting as observers, India having been elected
into the International Committee to membership by a unanimous vote during the11th meeting, held on Sunday, 5 September 1976.
DRAFT AGENDA FOR THE 12TH MEETING
The draft agenda for the 12th meeting, which had been given to all themembers of the Committee, was adopted after having agreed to include anadditional item concerning a new application for membership.
1. Approval of the report of the 11th meeting
The minutes of the 11th meeting was adopted, subject to the following
amendments:-page 2, item 2, fourth paragraph, line 3, read: “up-to-date”-page 4, item 8, second paragraph, line 2, read: “interval” instead of“internal”-page 4, item 8, third paragraph, a third sentence should be added to read“the International Committee duly noted the comments of the Japanese
Delegation and asked that the PPCNDT by-laws be amended accordingly”-page 4, item 10, seventh paragraph, read: …of Austria for 1982.
2. Report made by Mr. Granjon on the discussions of the working
group and the Round Table concerning the training and certification
of NDT personnel
At the President’s request, Mr. Granjon commented upon the report
established by the working group “Training and Certification” following its
meetings on 6 and 7 September 1976; this report had been handed over to allmembers of the International Committee and is appended to the present report.
(Appendix 1).
Following these comments and various remarks, it was decided:a) as regards the proposal mentioned under item 4, the report distributedwith the reference T 3.1 and entitled “Approval and certification of NDT
personnel” shall be forwarded to ISO/TC135 “Non-Destructive Testing” throughthe General Secretariat of the ISO, emphasizing that this document also
concerned other Technical Committees such as, for instance, ISO/TC44“Welding”; it was further decided that this document should also be forwarded tothe International Institute of Welding (IIW).
b) Concerning the suggestions mentioned under item 5 to accept tomaintain in office present members of the working group, to ask the U.S. andJapanese Delegations to appoint each a member as representative of therelevant region of the world, to maintain Mr. Granjon in his office of President
until the enlarged of working group is able to appoint itself its chairman, whoseterm of office corresponds to the time interval elapsing between two successiveconferences.

57c) Upon the examination of the tasks mentioned under item 6, to adopt
the proposals made after Mr. Granjon had pointed out that the contacts withother national authorities, within the framework of the mutual recognition ofequivalencies and if they proved to be necessary, remained under theresponsibility of National Delegates.
Finally, the report presented by the working group was adopted, Messrs
Tenney, Sharpe and Kopineck together with the President thanking Mr. Granjon
and the members of his group for the efforts made towards a better
understanding of existing systems and for the realistic proposals made. In thisrespect, Mr. Sharpe stressed the advantage of making this work known throughthe journals of the member Societies of the Committee; furthermore, he felt that it
would be advisable to undertake as rapidly as possible the tasks defined underitem 62 bis. New application for memberships in the International Committee
The President mentioned that he had received within the week, theapplication for membership of Israel, the body which was to represent thiscountry being the Israel Institute for Metals which belongs to the Industry
Department. The official letter of application for membership specified that Mr. S.
Golan, Director of the Israel Institute for Metals, secretary of the Israel
Metallurgical Society and member of the department “Non-Destructive Testing “of the latter, would be the voting member.
After a short discussion, the application for membership of Israel having
been subjected to a vote, among 23 countries represented, 20 voted in favour,and 2 against (U.S.S.R and Bulgaria). India did not take part in the vote owing tothe fact that its representatives acted only as observers.
Referring to the document “Terms of Reference” of the International
Committee, and more particularly to item 10.3, the Chairman noted that therequired majority of two-thirds of the countries represented on the International
Committee was exceeded and therefore declared Israel admitted. An official
letter should be addressed through the secretariat to the authorities representing
this country in order to inform them of this admission.
3. Organization of World Conferences
3.1 Discussion of Prof Hauk’s document
Upon the invitation of the President, Prof. Hauk, who had been invited toparticipate in the meeting as author of the project, presented the text establishedaccording to the decision made during the 10th meeting of the InternationalCommittee in Warsaw (item 4 of the relevant report).
The document was examined one paragraph after the other and following
the observations made, the text was amended during the meeting as follows:-under item 2, page 1:one paragraph underlining the responsibility of theorganizers for the scientific and technical quality of58

the presented papers, was added.
-under item 3, page 1: addition of one paragraph indicating that the call for
papers was to be made 1 year before theconference
page 2: addition of one paragraph concerning the dispatchof one copy of the papers to the President-under item 5, after a long discussion, it was decided to modify the lastsentence by mentioning that it was preferable not to use the system ofrapporteurs.
After this examination and taking into account the amendments made, thedocument was adopted, the final text would be edited by the secretariat with Prof.
V. Hauk and Mr. Sharpe’s helps.
Prof. Hauk having proposed that the document thus drawn up should be
now considered as the rule to be applied for the organization of the next
conferences, other members of the International Committee wished that this text
should only constitute a recommendation, the host country keeping a certain
autonomy for the preparation of the events.
This matter having been subjected to a vote by the President, 21 countries
pronounced in favour of a text of recommendation, 1 country (Federal Republicof Germany) in favour of a statutory document. Therefore, the title of thedocument would now be entitled “Recommendation for the Organization of WorldConferences on Non Destructive Testing”. In this respect, Mr. Sheldon specified
that the first arrangements made by the Australian Delegation were in live withthe recommendation just adopted.
3.2 Additional examination of Mr. Stanger’s document
In accordance with the decision made at the 11th meeting of theInternational Committee, the memorandum prepared by Mr. Stanger for therapporteurs had been included again in the agenda of the present meeting, inorder to take account of the discussions relating to the previous text.
Referring to the decision of the International Committee, which had justdeemed it preferable not to have rapporteurs, Mr. Stanger decided to withdraw
his proposal for the moment.
The Committee noting this decision, considered that the memorandum
should not be further discussed.
4. Venues for Future Conferences
Following the decision made during the meeting of 5 September 1975 toEntrust Australia with the organization of the 9th World Conference, the President
reminded the meeting that three invitations had been received for the 10thConference in 1982, namely from Austria, U.S.S.R and the USA and there wasalso an invitation from Japan for the 11th Conference in 1985.
However, before examining this question, Mr. Kopineck wished, on behalfof the Delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, that the questions
previously raised i.e.:59

-the modification of the procedure of the International Committee laid
down in the booklet “Terms of Reference”, in order to take account of alldecisions made during the two meetings which had been held in Cannes.
-the convening of an intermediate meeting of the International Committee
in 1978 on the occasion of the conference organized in Mainz by the German
Society of Non Destructive Testing, be discussed and that decisions be made onthese matters.
As regards the first matter, it was decided, after discussion, to set up asmall working group comprising of the new President (Australia) and the three
past Presidents whose task would be to modify the rules and update them.
As regards the second matter and taking account of the fact that the placechosen for the next conference might limit the participation in the meetings of theInternational Committee, the principle of a meeting of the latter in Mainz (Federal
Republic of Germany) in April 1978 was decided. The Australian Steering
Committee should be entrusted with the sending of the notice and the agenda ofthis meeting.
These decisions being made, the President mentioned again theinvitations received for the 10th World Conference and proposed a vote, recalling
that, in keeping with point 9.1 of the “Terms of Reference”, the result of this vote
had only an indicative value. The result of the vote for twenty two represented
countries was as follows:- U.S.S.R: 16 votes- Austria: 3 votes- USA: 2 votes- Abstention: 1
The principle of holding the 10th World Conference in U.S.S.R in 1982 wasthus adopted and should be confirmed at a later date, by following the procedureprovided for in point 9.1 already mentioned.
5. Proposals for the award of certificates of distinction
Following the decision made during the preceding meeting andaccordance with point 13 of the “Terms of Reference”, the President met Prof.
V.Hauk and Prof. Pawlowski, the past Presidents, to examine the proposals
made.
Following this meeting, a text had been established which contains thesuggestions submitted to all the members attending the meeting (Appendix II)
After a short discussion, the International Committee unanimously
adopted the suggestions contained in the document.
The Chairman then congratulated Prof. Homes who thanked all hiscolleagues for the honour bestowed upon him and this token of friendship.
Finally the Chairman asked the German Delegation to transmit thecongratulations of the International Committee to Prof. Vaupel.

60

6. Liaison with ISO/TC 135
The President informed the International Committee of the contacts withISO/TC 135, particularly as regards the activities of the new Sub-Committee 7“Personnel Qualification”. An exchange of correspondence took place on thatsubject.
The International Committee noted this information.
7. Comments on the 8th World Conference on Non-Destructive Testing
All members present joined Dr. G.H. Tenney, Prof. Z. Pawlowski, and Prof.
H.J. Kopineck, in congratulating the French Organizing Committee for the way inwhich the event had been prepared, as regards to the working meetings as wellas the whole social program.
However the attention was drawn on the fact that the number of papers
presented represented a maximum which should not be exceeded in theforthcoming conferences. Nevertheless and although the French Organizing
Committee had refused papers or asked that certain papers dealing with related
subjects be group together, it was recognized that the position of organizers wasalways delicate when proposals of authors were to be refused. In this field, theassistance of the member Societies of the International Committee could be
asked for.
8. Miscellaneous Questions
8.1 On the President’s invitation, Mr. Kopineck gave some information
about the conference planned for April 1978 in Mainz (Federal Republic ofGermany) specifying that this event only concerned European Countries as was
the case for that organized by the PPCNDT. This conference should have nobearing on the evolution of the 9th World Conference
The International Committee took note of this information.
8.2 The President expressed again his thanks and gratitude, on behalf ofthe International Committee, to Prof. G. Homes, one of the founders of the World
Conferences, who had untiringly dedicated himself to the development of Non
Destructive Testing. Prof. Homes participating for the last time as a voting
member for Belgium within the International Committee, his colleagues
expressed to him their regrets for his departure as well as their gratitude for hisaction at international level.
8.3 Prof. Azou informed the International Committee of the arrangementsmade for the closing session of the 8th World Conference.

61

APPENDIX I
Report by the Working Group on “Training and Certification”
To the International Committee
The Working Group “Training and Certification” (members: Mr. GranjonFrance, Dr. Schaper-Germany, Mr. Young-United Kingdom) met on September
6th and 7th 1976 to prepare its recommendations to the International Committee,
as a follow-up of the work covered by the report disseminated under No.T.3-1
and submitted to the Round Table Conference. This work and the report dealwith the problem of certification only. The Working Group indeed felt that priority
should be given to this problem, over and above training which depends from it.
The following comments and recommendations are submitted to theInternational Committee’s appreciation:
1. The Working Group felt that its mission was related to the certificationof the inspection personnel itself, which is carried out independently from theapproval of such personnel by the firms employing them. Certification is the setof procedures used to check the ability of an operator to carry out a reliableinspection by a given inspection method and for a given application; a certificate
is issued to the successful operator.
2. The Working Group confirmed that under the present circumstances,taking into account the difficulties and time involved by the setting up of a unified
specification for the certification of inspection personnel, it was necessary to
encourage whatever efforts are undertaken to negotiate agreements for themutual recognition of existing systems, on the basis of a careful comparison. Inorder to promote such negotiations this report gives a list of headings to be taken
into account when undertaking such a comparison. The table in the appendix isprovided as an example of the use of this list in connection with the four systems
in force at this time. This example has not been drawn up for purposed ofselection; any other existing systems will have to be described according to thesame method.
3. Although the Working Group already started discussing some of theseheadings, it does not feel that recommendations should be made immediately on
the solutions to be adopted. The drawing up of such recommendations might bepart of the future program of activities of the Group. But, in connection with item I(i.e. levels of qualification) the Group wished to stress that it is urgent to give aprecise and unified definition of the tasks entrusted to senior operators (e.g. level
2 of ASNT, CSWIP ultra…)
4. Not only can the report of the Working Group be used for thecomparison of existing systems and the negotiation of agreements for the mutual
recognition of equivalencies, but also as a standard plan for the preparation ofcertification systems in countries wishing to set up such systems. The Group
therefore proposed to forward this report to ISO TC 135 and to any otherinterested ISO Committees, as well as to the International Institute for Welding.
5. For the continuation of the work within the framework of the World
Conference on Non Destructive Testing, the Group welcomed the intention of theInternational Committee to add further members to it. For the sake of continuity it62

suggested that the present members be maintained, subject to the approval of
their national organizations. It suggested also that the Chairman of the enlarged
Group be elected by the members themselves and that his term of edifice extend
to the next Congress. It furthermore proposed that Mr. Granjon remain in thechair until the election of the new Chairman.
6. The tasks of the Working Group might be the following:a) To continue with the comparison of the existing certification systems,on the basis of the headings listed in the report; the wording of these headings
might be further improved.
b) To encourage by all appropriate means negotiations for the mutual
recognition of equivalencies, and possibly to provide opinions if such are sought.
c) To continue with a more thorough study of the headings listed in thereport, in order to draft recommendations whenever possible.
7. The Working Group felt that the scope of work defined in paragraph 6
is so important and such a matter of priority, that training problems should not be
dealt with at this stage.
Cannes, September 7th 1976

63

APPENDIX IIINTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING
In accordance with terms of reference of the I.C.N.D.T. Prof. Hauk, Prof.
Pawlowski, and Mr. Evrard met on Wednesday 8th of September 1976 toexamine the proposals made by the United Kingdom and German delegates onbehalf of Prof. Homes, Prof. Vaupel and Dr. Mullins.
Considering that no more than two certificates of distinction should beawarded per world Conference, the group suggested that:1) certificates of distinction might be awarded to Prof. Homes and Prof.
Vaupel as founding members of the International Committee on NDT.
2) The decision on Dr. Mullins might be made at the next meeting of theInternational Committee, national delegations being moreover
requested to consider further nominations, to be forwarded in writing tothe next secretariat.

64