CWS (CWNP): The High Performer Who Runs Hot

Dana is right, and the passing radiographs do not make the welds conforming.

Amperage is an essential variable in a qualified WPS. Welding at 130 A against a 90-110 A range means the weld was not made under the qualified procedure - it is nonconforming regardless of how it looks on film. RT finds volumetric and crack-like discontinuities; it does not measure heat input, hardness, or toughness, which is precisely what an amperage excursion changes on chrome-moly. On a P-No. 4 or 5 material, elevated heat input can shift hardness and cracking susceptibility in ways that show up in service, not on a radiograph.

So the disposition is not "Ray's welds are fine." It is a documented review of those welds against the WPS - heat input calculation, and hardness testing where the WPS or customer requires it - followed by engineering acceptance or repair.

The wider exposure is worse than one spool. Two younger welders have copied the practice, which makes this a systemic escape, and the superintendent's request asks you to trade a code violation for schedule on work headed into a refinery turnaround. That is the decision that ends up in a hearing, not a production meeting.

Private, data-first, and consistent with how you would treat anyone else.

• Open with the skill, not the defect. Ask what drove the change: production pressure, a machine that will not hold arc at 95 A, or a root fusion problem he was solving. The answer determines whether the fix is procedural or equipment.
• Then be explicit that the amperage is the issue, not his ability. The WPS range is not a suggestion, and the shop superintendent's support does not change it. Use the handbook's ladder - documented coaching, written warning, then suspension - and set a follow-up date.
• Apply it to the two welders who copied him as well, at a lesser level but still documented. If the crew sees that only the senior man was spoken to, they learn the rule is discretionary.
• Keep him, deliberately. He is a scarce 6G chrome-moly resource; losing him over this would be a self-inflicted wound. Consider giving him the heat-input and machine-setup training role for the younger welders, which turns his speed into the standard instead of the exception.
• Remove the incentive. If the qualified range genuinely costs time, the route is a new procedure qualified at higher amperage through engineering, not a floor decision at the machine.

Authority is rebuilt in public and in front of the crew, not in a memo.

• Walk the bay with Dana this week and be seen doing it. When a welder pushes back, the answer comes from you: hold points are hers, and disputes route to the supervisor, not to the fitter.
• Restore the visible standard: post the qualified amperage, voltage and travel range at each chrome-moly station, and put the heat-input calculation on the wall where the machine settings are made. Ambiguity is what let 130 A look reasonable.
• Retrain the two welders who copied the practice, and say why to the whole crew - code, customer specification, and the refinery turnaround. People follow a rule they understand faster than one they are told about.
• Take the superintendent the numbers, not the principle. A rejected spool and a re-test costs more than a few days of liquidated damages at $2,500/day, and a weld that fails in a turnaround is a lost account. Offer the recovery plan at the same time: resequence non-code work, add a Saturday shift on the manual spools, and protect the hold points.
• If the direction persists after that conversation, escalate in writing. Backing the inspector is the supervisor's job; letting the crew watch her be overruled is how a quality system quietly stops working.